主 页 分类浏览

研究称共享汽车增加事故率是真的吗?小编为你还原真相!

我们知道,共享汽车在国内是很受欢迎的新事物,不过日前有文章称,美国一项研究表明,共享汽车服务实际上增加了事故率,到底是怎么回事呢?

研究称共享汽车增加事故率是真的吗?小编为你还原真相!

该文章标题为《研究表明:共享出行增多会导致了更多的事故和死亡》,文中称,国外研究表明共享汽车增加了事故率,见下图

研究称共享汽车增加事故率是怎么回事?

由于此文是引用国外研究观点,是否有断章取义之嫌?

我们来看看研究报告的原文:

原文标题:《Study: Uber and Lyft are Increasing Traffic Deaths》

A new study [PDF] from the Booth School at the University of Chicago estimates Uber and Lyft have increased traffic deaths by 2-3 percent nationally. That’s as many as 1,100 additional deaths a year — a small, but significant contribution to the increase in traffic deaths in the U.S. since 2011, the authors say.

研究称共享汽车增加事故率是怎么回事?

Uber and Lyft have tried to market themselves as green companies that can help solve urban transportation problems, but the evidence keeps piling up that they are making many problems worse.

This new study backs up previous findings that Uber and Lyft have cannibalized transit trips and increased driving. The study found that cities with high adoption of Uber and Lyft had 3 percent more total miles driven daily on average than cities with low adoption. The effect was even bigger in larger cities and cities that had high rates of transit ridership. And more miles mean more deaths.

“”We need to think of the wholistic costs and benefits,” lead author John Barrios told Streetsblog. “We can’t just focus on the benefits and ignore the costs.”

The costs are significant: Cities with high Uber and Lyft usage had more pedestrian deaths, more traffic deaths at night, more traffic deaths on weekends and more traffic deaths overall than the trend would have predicted, compared to other cities. Even drunk driving deaths were essentially unchanged by the presence of Uber and Lyft, Barrios and his team found.

On total car ownership, more bad news. Cities with high Uber and Lyft activity actually had 3 percent higher new vehicle registrations (see this for New York City’s experience). Uber and Lyft might discourage car ownership among some higher-income riders, but app-based taxis seem to induce more car buying among lower-income people that work as drivers, Barrios found.

As Streetsblog reported, Uber and Lyft increase congestion partly because drivers spend 40 to 60 percent of their time circling without passengers, also known as “deadheading.” Barrios and his team said, Uber and Lyft’s policies make the problem worse.

“Rideshare companies often subsidize drivers to stay on the road even when utilization is low, to ensure that supply is quickly available,” they wrote.

In addition, drivers for Uber and Lyft receive little training and are relatively inexperienced compared to the taxi drivers they replaced. And the companies perform little quality control compared to other commercial drivers.

Edna Umeh, a school crossing guard, was killed in November in suburban Atlanta when she was struck at 51 miles per hour — about twice the speed limit — by a Uber driver. The driver, Lamonte Whitaker, said he had fallen asleep at the wheel.

Uber has been slow to impose limits on drowsy driving that apply to other commercial drivers. Just this year, it imposed a rule that drivers must take a six-hour break after driving for 12 hours straight, a much weaker standard than the federal government requires for most commercial drivers.

A spokesperson for Lyft called the study “deeply flawed” in a statement. “Numerous studies have shown that rideshare has reduced DUIs, provided safe transportation in areas underserved by other options, and dramatically improved mobility in cities.”

But Barrios said the other studies that showed Uber and Lyft reduce DUIs did not properly control for the fact that DUIs had already begun to decline before ride-hailing apps were introduced.

原文直译

研究:优步和Lyft正在增加交通死亡率

注:

优步:美国最大的打车服务品牌

Lyft:美国打车服务Lyft已收购北美市场上最大的单车出租公司Motivate。在被Lyft收购之后,该公司被更名为Lyft Bikes。

来自芝加哥大学布斯商学院的一项新研究[PDF]估计优步和Lyft在全国范围内的交通死亡人数增加了2-3%。这组作者说,这可能导致每年多达1,100人死亡 - 这是对2011年以来美国交通死亡人数增加的一小部分影响。

优步和Lyft试图推销自己作为绿色公司,可以帮助解决城市交通问题,但有证据表明,他们正在使许多问题变得更糟。

这项新的研究支持了先前的调查结果,即优步和Lyft已经蚕食过境旅行和增加驾驶。该研究发现,Uber和Lyft采用率较高的城市平均每日行驶里程数比采用率较低的城市多3%。在拥有高交通乘客率的大城市和城市中,这种影响甚至更大。更多英里意味着更多的死亡。

“我们需要考虑整体成本和收益,”主要作者John Barrios告诉Streetsblog。 “我们不能只关注利益而忽视成本。”

成本非常高:与其他城市相比,Uber和Lyft使用率较高的城市行人死亡人数增多,夜间交通死亡人数增多,周末交通死亡人数增多,整体交通死亡人数也超过预期。巴里奥斯和他的团队发现,甚至酒后驾车的死亡人数基本没有因优步和Lyft的存在而改变。

关于汽车总拥有量,有更多坏消息。例如 Uber和Lyft活动较多的城市实际上新车注册量增加了3%(纽约市的经验看这一点)。巴里奥斯发现,优步和Lyft可能会阻止一些高收入车手的汽车拥有权,但基于应用的出租车似乎会导致更多的汽车购买者作为司机的低收入人群。

正如Streetsblog报道的那样,Uber和Lyft增加了拥堵,部分原因是司机花费40%到60%的时间在没有乘客的情况下盘旋,也被称为“顽固”.Barrios和他的团队说,Uber和Lyft的政策使问题变得更糟。

他们写道:“即使在利用率较低的情况下,Rideshare公司也经常补贴司机保持在路上,以确保供应迅速可用。”

此外,与他们所取代的出租车司机相比,Uber和Lyft的司机接受的培训很少,而且相对缺乏经验。与其他商业驱动程序相比,这些公司的质量控制很少。

Edna Umeh,一名学校过路警卫,于11月在亚特兰大郊区被一名优步司机以每小时51英里(约为速度限制的两倍)击中身亡。司机Lamonte Whitaker说他已经在车轮上睡着了。

优步对于适用于其他商业驾驶员的昏昏欲睡驾驶施加限制的速度很慢。就在今年,它实施了一项规则,即司机必须在连续驾驶12小时后休息6小时,这比联邦政府对大多数商业驾驶员所要求的标准要弱得多。

Lyft的一位发言人在一份声明中称这项研究“存在严重缺陷”。 “大量研究表明,rideshare降低了DUI,在其他选择不足的地区提供了安全的运输,并大大改善了城市的流动性。”

但巴里奥斯表示,其他研究表明优步和Lyft减少酒后驾车不能正确控制因为在引入乘车应用程序之前DUI已经开始下降的事实。

结论:莱斯大学教授Yael V.Hochberg的研究只是以优步等(类似滴滴打车)的网租车公司为研究对象,并非针对共享汽车

不得不说,这其中的误会可不少啊,共享汽车说,这锅我不背。

  

领券请关注微信公号“要领”

  

手机版 电脑版

版权所有:共享汽车网