Killed by a Traffic Engineer: Shattering the Delusion that Science Underlies our Transportation System

Wesley E. Marshall, PhD, PE, author of Killed by a Traffic Engineer (2024), is a Professor of Civil Engineering and on the faculty in Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Colorado at Denver (UCD). At UCD he focuses on teaching transportation courses and dedicates his research to creating more sustainable urban infrastructures, particularly regarding road safety, active transportation, and transit systems. Other teaching and research topics involve transportation planning, land use modeling, parking, health, and street networks. Before arriving at the university, he was in the private sector with Sasaki Associates and Clough, Harbour, and Associates, where he worked on planning and site design related to civil and transportation engineering for fifteen years.A native of Watertown, Massachusetts, Wes went to an exclusive prep school, the University of Virginia, and the University of Connecticut, where he was a recipient of the Dwight Eisenhower Transportation Fellowship, and winner of the Charley V. Wootan Award for Outstanding Paper in the field of Policy and Organization. Lest we take all these credentials too seriously, it is no secret among his close acquaintances that he claims that he went to the University of Virginia because he was an ardent collegiate basketball fan and wanted to attend a school where they had at least decent sports programs. As a sports fan he keeps skin in the game by playing NFL fantasy football. However, Wes is no coach potato and bikes several miles to work, even in inclement weather. An outspoken advocate of cycling as an alternate means of transportation, he practices what he preaches.From this introduction, the reader should get the drift that Dr. Marshall is not your stereotypical engineer, operating in a silo, unaware of anything beyond his teaching and narrow research specialty, and publishing in only academically correct journals. Regarding the latter, for example, Wes breaks the academic stereotype of the standard good old-boy academician by publishing his book through a non-university publisher.The reasons for choosing this publishing path are because traditional university presses operate within specific academic paradigms and prioritize works that align with establishment sanctioned theories and methodologies. This modus operandi limits intellectual diversity and innovative ideas that challenge the status quo. University presses tend to function within an echo chamber, where editors, as gatekeepers, entertain only certain viewpoints and content, resulting in a feedback loop that reinforces existing biases and assumptions.These practices, assumptions that belie transpiration engineers claim to be scientific and effective include:1) Regarding safety as an afterthought: transportation engineers believe that safety is often not the primary consideration in road design, which leads to dangerous conditions for all road users.2) Focusing on speed and capacity: transportation specialists emphasize moving vehicles quickly and efficiently is at the expense of safety and quality of life.3) Relying on data and assumptions that have not been thoroughly examined or validated and repeating them as “facts” in the classroom and publications.4) Blaming human error. Transportation engineers blame human error for accidents rather than examining how road design contributes to these errors.As per practice # 3, these assumptions become transportation paradigm "laws" passed from generation to generation and woe to those who defy or question them and the paradigm.One way Marshall breaks this self-perpetuating isolating system is by publishing Killed by a Traffic Engineer with an independent publisher, Island Press. Eschewing the traditional university publication route allowed Wes to persuade more critical and transformative thinkers to question the value and validity of what established academe assumed to be tried and true. This publishing choice can lead to more robust discussions and debates, essential for advancement any field.Island Press is known for its interdisciplinary approach, which can be particularly beneficial for a book that intersects with multiple fields, such as transportation, environmental science, and public policy --- Dr. Marshall is also on UCD’s college of Urban and Regional Planning. This approach can help break down silos and encourage cross-disciplinary collaboration and innovation, which is one of the main reasons for Wes writing his book.Moreover, by publishing with Island Press, Killed by a Traffic Engineer can reach a wider audience, including policymakers, practitioners, and the general public. This broader impact will lead to real-world changes and innovations that are less achievable through the more insular academic channels of traditional university presses.In addition, Island Press specializes in environmental and sustainability topics. Killed by an Engineer, which challenges the supposed science of transportation systems, aligns well with the alternate press' mission to promote sustainable solutions. Island Press has a strong reputation in these fields and is well-regarded by professionals, academics, and policymakers despite its avant-garde publications.These factors help Marshall's book reach a broader and more targeted audience, including those influential in the transportation and environmental sectors who may be open to Wes' message. Island Press offers more content and presentation flexibility as a non-profit publisher than traditional academic presses. These factors allow authors to present their ideas in a more impactful and accessible way to challenge conventional thinking and promote new ideas in transportation engineering. In sum, Island Press' mission to advance environmental and sustainability knowledge provides a supportive and aligned platform for Wes' work.Wes' writing style is minimalist, direct, and free-flowing, with illustrative quotes and personal vignettes. At the same time, he backs his writing with extensive research that gives the book a gravitas and substance not found in most supposedly "scholarly" works. Moreover, the book’s content fits well within its constructed frame: Dr. Marshall structured Killed by a Traffic Engineer into 12 parts and 88 chapters to provide a comprehensive and detailed critique of traffic engineering practice. By dividing the book into many short chapters, Marshall makes it easier for the reader to delve deeply into the denser aspects of traffic engineering. Specifically:1) Shorter chapters make the book’s complexities more accessible and easier to read. Readers can digest complex information in smaller, more manageable parts.2) Moreover, each chapter focuses on a specific topic or issue, allowing for a more organized and pinpoint discussion to help readers understand the nuances of difficult issues and topics..3) Thirdly, the structure engages readers by providing frequent breaks and a sense of progression through the book.Marshall's goal in writing Killed by a Traffic Engineer, which has the subtitle, Shattering the Delusion that Science Underlies our Transportation System, is a call to arms for traffic engineers to shift their mindset in solving transportation issues to prioritize the safety and well-being of all users, instead of merely paying lip-service to these issues. By putting human values of care and concern over machine values of efficiency and profit, Wes has already shifted an engineering paradigm. The book is a must-read for engineers and conscientious laypeople who wish to be more aware and better informed about significant matters in an academic engineering world full of fake beliefs, fake science, and fake scholarship.

U.S. traffic fatalities are higher than those in other rich countries, and have risen in recent years (especially for pedestrians). In Killed by A Traffic Engineer, engineering professor Wes Marshall explains that this problem is at least partially rooted in American traffic engineering: engineers design streets that accommodate fast vehicle traffic at the expense of safety. Why is this?Marshall suggests several root causes: 1) First of all, American engineers receive almost no academic training about traffic, and even less about safety. A student can graduate college with a civil engineering degree and pass a licensure exam while having taken no courses related to transportation. Even universities with transportation courses rarely learn anything about road safety.2) engineers often rely on research that is outdated or irrelevant. For example, 1930s research on industrial worker accidents found that for every accident that caused a major injury, there are 29 that caused minor accidents and 300 that caused no accidents. Traffic engineers noticed this research and assumed that in the traffic context, it was also true that places that have very few small accidents also have very few major accidents. But this point of view is incorrect in the context of auto traffic- a fast-moving highway might have very few minor accidents, but far more severe injuries because if you are hit by a car going 60 miles per hour, you will be more severely injured than if you are hit by a car going 20 miles per hour. Because midcentury traffic engineers did not notice this difference between highways and factories, they thought streets with fast-moving traffic would be safer than they turned out to be. Similarly, the American custom of 12-foot travel lanes is based on research that shows nothing about road safety outcomes, but instead on a 1945 study showing only that trucks “shift slightly more to the right” on narrower roads.3) traffic engineers try to avoid blame for crashes by blaming human error but overlook the fact that some street design rules are more likely to produce human error than others. For example, Marshall notes that many signalized intersections “give pedestrians the walk signal while we simultaneously allow drivers to turn directly into where we just told pedestrians they could safely walk.” But if both drivers and pedestrians have the right of way at the same time, human error leading to crashes is more likely.4) traffic engineers treat roads like buildings. When engineers design buildings, they may add larger-than-necessary materials to prevent structures from collapsing. When engineers reason by analogy, they favor bigger roads with higher design speeds. This may be a fine strategy for a limited-access highway, but creates a high risk of death or serious injury on streets that are used by slow-moving road users such as pedestrians and slow-turning vehicles.

I was a traffic engineer early in my career. This book makes you think. I recommend it for anyone that is involved in transportation, pedestrian, bicycle planning or funding. It makes you think. It is a bit radical. He almost recommends no lines on roads, because on a clear day cars go faster, but he does not talk about a snowy night or when the new bright headlights in your eyes leave the lines on the road the only way you know where the road is, but his opinions should be considered.

A fantastic literature synthesis that goes deep into road design and, my favorite insight, design speed! Its like Death and Life of Great American Cities with a focus on U.S. streets.