Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Research Part F

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/trf

Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic

safety culture in China, Japan and the United States
Paul Atchley a,⇑, Jing Shi b,⇑, Toshiyuki Yamamoto c
a
Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, United States
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, China
c
EcoTopia Science Institute, Nagoya University, Japan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Understanding how to assess the influence of culture on traffic safety is important for
Available online xxxx improving traffic safety globally. Traffic safety culture is embedded in the larger context
of country’s cultural norms and values, producing different safety outcomes even when
Keywords: other factors are similar. The current work examines how culture influences traffic safety
Safety culture outcomes in three of the largest automobile countries in the world, but which have very
Risk avoidance different cultural values and which also have very different traffic safety outcomes: China,
Crash reduction
Japan and the United States. China has an emerging driver population and cultural values
Driver freedom
that result in aberrant driving behaviors and ‘‘scrambling’’ to gain the right of way, produc-
ing a high number of crashes. Japan has an established driver culture, but an emphasis on
reducing risk, which results in a lower rate of crashes. The United States, with the most
established ‘‘car culture’’, has an historical and cultural view of the car as a representation
of freedom, leading to choices that result in higher crash rates than many countries around
the world. The current work explores these cultural underpinnings for traffic safety culture
in each country by establishing the historical basis for a traffic culture, examining road,
vehicle engineering and legal standards, and reviewing available crash data and data on
safety attitudes. These countries are compared across the different dimensions to establish
unique cultural influences on traffic safety.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

One of the most consistent findings in psychological science, and one that is often most puzzling, is how actions can be
disconnected from attitudes. For example, though younger drivers rate texting as one of the most risky behaviors they can
engage in behind the wheel (Atchley, Atwood, & Boulton, 2011) and they indicate that a texting driver is more responsible for
a crash than a drunk driver (Atchley, Hadlock, & Lane, 2012), they text and drive at alarmingly high rates. (Atchley et al.
(2011) found about 97% admit to texting while driving in some form.) Behaviors are influenced by a wide range of subtle
influences that drivers are often unaware of, including the behaviors of those around them. The behaviors of others, or per-
ceived norms, can be very local such as in a family or in a place of work, and they can be very broad, such as across a national
culture. The perceived norms that influence the willingness to engage in risky behaviors or willingly choose best safety
practice can be referred to as ‘‘safety culture.’’

⇑ Corresponding authors. Address: 1415 Jayhawk Blvd., Lawrence, Kansas 66045, United States. Tel.: +1 (785) 864 9803 (P. Atchley). Address: Institute of
Transportation Engineering R&D, Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, China (S. Jing). Tel./fax: +86 10 62772300.
E-mail addresses: patchley@ku.edu (P. Atchley), jingshi@tsinghua.edu.cn (J. Shi).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
1369-8478/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
2 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

One way to understand the safety culture is to compare the cultural practice of one group to another. In the current work
we will examine national cultural influences in a comparison of three countries: China, Japan, and the United States. These
countries were chose because each country has a unique ‘‘automobility’’ (Seiler, 2008) history, different cultural values that
impact traffic safety, and different levels of safety on their roadways. Understanding the factors that produce these differ-
ences can provide an insight into the safety culture of each country as well as a better understanding of the factors that influ-
ence safety culture more generally.
To examine the safety cultures of these countries we chose the multilevel framework suggested by Özkan and Lajunen
(2011) that divides analysis into external and internal factors. The current analysis will first summarize the automotive
safety records of the three countries. We then examine automobility history and other national elements (economic, gover-
nance and cultural values) as the external factors influencing safety culture and structural issues (traffic engineering and
vehicle safety) as the ecocultural sociopolitical internal factor. We have chosen these elements based on the availability
of these data across all three countries. The work will conclude with comparisons of these analyses and insights about safety
culture more generally, with recommendations about how cultural values can be used to impact safety culture in a positive
way.
To be clear about the scope of this work, the intent of this work is to not provide a complete sociocultural analysis across
the three countries examined, and to relate that to safety culture. Such an analysis would need to examine culture from a
variety of levels and would clearly be beyond the scope of the current work. However, we do intend to include data from
a number of cultural dimensions in two frameworks (Hofstede, 2013; Schwartz, 2004) and make reference to aspects in
those frameworks that we feel are consistent with the broad view from the other components of the analysis (history
and structural issues). (Brief descriptions of the dimensions of each framework are provided in Appendix A).

1.1. Crash rate comparison across China, Japan and the United States

Crash rates can be summarized by crashes, injuries and fatalities per number of drivers, number of cars or number of kilo-
meters driven. Trends across time can also produce insights into efforts to improve safety and changes in safety culture with-
in a country. Because of large population differences between the countries, comparing crash rates in this analysis is best
accomplished on a per vehicle basis. A summary of data for crashes, injuries and fatalities for the number of registered vehi-
cles on the roads (the only data available for all three countries) for a period from 1990 (the first year such data are available
for China) to 2010 (for every four years to allow examination of trends) is presented in Table 1.
Table 1 shows the Unites States maintains the largest car culture of the three countries, but it also reveals that China has
experienced fourteen-fold increase in registered vehicles in the last twenty years, now matching Japan for the total number
of registered vehicles on its roads. As this growth has occurred, the per vehicle crash, injury and fatality rates have declined,
possibly owing to improved traffic regulations (see Section 2.1.1) and broader driver and pedestrian experience with traffic.
Despite these improvements, the fatality rate in China is still very high (83.61 deaths per 100,000 vehicles) compared to Ja-
pan (6.15 deaths) or the United States (12.77 deaths).
While the latter countries have made gains in road safety over the last two decades, three interesting points are worth
noting. First, both Japan and the US have reduced fatality rates but the fatality rate in the Unites States is now twice as high
as in Japan compared to about 25% higher in 1990. This trend remains true when the US is compared to countries as well,
where it ranks 24th on this safety statistic (WHO, 2013), revealing how the US has fallen behind the efforts of other countries

Table 1
Number of registered vehicles and total reported crashes, injuries and fatalities for China, Japan and the United States from 1990 to 2010. Lower numbers are
per 100,000 vehicles.

Year Chinaa Japanb United Statesc

d d
Vehicles Crashes Injuries Fatalities Vehicles Crashes Injuries Fatalities Vehiclesd Crashes Injuries Fatalities
1990 5510 250,297 155,072 49,271 60,650 643,097 790,295 11,227 184,275 6,471,000 3,231,000 44,599
4542.60 2814.37 894.21 1060.34 1303.04 18.51 3511.60 1753.36 24.20
1994 9410 253,537 148,817 66,362 68,180 729,457 881,723 10,649 192,497 6,496,000 3,266,000 40,716
2694.34 1581.48 705.23 1069.90 1293.23 15.62 3374.60 1696.65 21.15
1998 13,190 346,129 222,721 78,067 74,010 803,878 990,675 9,211 208,076 6,355,000 3,192,000 41,501
2624.18 1688.56 591.87 1086.17 1338.57 12.45 3054.17 1534.05 19.95
2002 20,530 773,137 526,074 109,381 77,300 936,721 1,167,855 8,326 227,136 6,316,000 2,926,000 43,005
3770.85 2565.84 533.49 1211.80 1510.81 10.77 2780.71 1288.21 18.93
2006 36,970 378,781 431,139 89,455 79,450 886,864 1,098,199 6,352 252,930 5,973,000 2,575,000 42,708
1024.56 1166.19 241.97 1116.25 1382.25 7.99 2361.52 1018.07 16.89
2010 78,010 219,521 254,075 65,225 79,090 737,474 911,108 4,863 257,515 5,419,000 2,239,000 32,885
281.40 325.70 83.61 932.45 1151.99 6.15 2104.34 869.46 12.77
a
National Bureau of Statistics of China (2011).
b
Cabinet Office (2012).
c
NHTSA (2011).
d
Registered motor vehicles in thousands.

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 3

(see Evans, 2004, for a more complete description of this trend). Second, the trend is reversed when it comes to injury rates,
where the US performed more poorly than Japan in 1990 (1753.96 versus 1303.04 injuries per 100,000 vehicles in the US and
Japan, respectively) but now does better (859.46 versus 1151.99 injuries per 100,000 vehicles). Third, the crash rate in Japan
has declined by a small margin over the last twenty years (declining by about 12%) but the fatality rate has been cut by two-
thirds, while in the US crashes and fatalities have declined at about the same pace (about 40% and 50%, respectively). In the
next sections we will explore possible historical, structural and cultural bases for these diverging patterns of traffic safety.

2. Overview of China, Japan and the Unites States

2.1. China

2.1.1. Historical overview

China has a long history and set of cultural traditions, but one of the newest cultures of traffic, making it a very interesting
model for the development of traffic safety culture. In 1949 when the new China was established, there were only approx-
imately 80,000 km of national highway mileage, the estimated numbers of privately owned motor vehicles was very small,
and traffic safety laws were non-existant. As socio-economic development occurred over the next half-century, China began
the process of developing traffic safety rules and then laws to govern urban traffic management, facilitate transportation, and
improve traffic safety. In 1955, in order to meet the needs of national economic construction, the Ministry of Public Security
implemented the ‘‘Rules of Urban Traffic’’. In 1988, in order to enhance road traffic management, to maintain traffic order,
and protect the safety and smooth flow of traffic to meet the needs of modernization, the State Council promulgated the
‘‘Road Traffic Regulations of People’s Republic of China’’.
It was not until 2004 that China implemented its first traffic safety laws: the ‘‘Law on Road Traffic Safety’’. The aim was to
maintain traffic order, to prevent and reduce traffic crashes, to provide physical protection for personal safety, to give pro-
tection for property and other legitimate rights and interests for citizens, legal persons and other organizations, and to im-
prove the efficiency of movement. Amendments have been added in recent years to deal with emergency traffic
management, traffic security specifications, construction standards, and violation processing. China has also created and
had special enforcement of laws regarding drunk driving and the use of safety belts, culminating in a program in 2009 that
led to the investigation of 304,000 drunk driving violations (with 41,000 prosecutions) and 273,000 safety belt violations
(and 37,000 punishments by administrative detention).

2.1.2. Structural overview

With recent rapid economic development, construction of transportation infrastructure has proceeded very quickly.
Chinese map producer, Sinomaps, reports needing to update its Beijing maps every three months due to the pace of change
(Hessler, 2010, p. 102). Due to the rapid increase in automobiles and widespread construction, China has a number of safety
issues with its traffic infrastructure. The relatively short history of traffic culture leads to a shortage of design engineers with
expertise in traffic engineering. These problems are further exacerbated by the state of relevant construction standards and
regulations, which are missing, not adequately communicated or understood, or not adequately enforced. A ‘‘road safety
audit’’ process has not been implemented into the design procedure, leading to insufficient traffic safety standards. Examples
of issues caused by these problems include the smaller spacing of urban expressway entrances, compared to Japan or the
United States, leading to crashes between cars and roadways in urban environments that are too wide and signal lengths
that are too long, leading to pedestrian crossing behaviors that are unsafe, including ignoring traffic signals and crossing
roads with active traffic or standing in the middle of traffic waiting to complete crossing the road.

2.1.3. Cultural analysis

The historical overview of China’s traffic culture reveals that the earliest considerations for rules and regulations regard-
ing traffic were oriented toward economic and not personal security. The earliest rules were simply guidelines to improve
the flow of traffic, and not laws to enforce safety practice. Only very recently have laws become oriented toward protecting
drivers and, to a lesser extent, pedestrians from poor safety practice, such as the 2009 enacting and enforcement of drunk
driving and safety belt use laws. Thus, it appears that in the very brief history of China’s traffic culture, the emphasis is eco-
nomically utilitarian.
This utilitarian approach is reflected in the ways in which drivers and pedestrians approach traffic laws. Initial studies of
driving behavior in China showed that drivers commonly violate traffic laws (Shi, Bai, Ying, & Atchley, 2010). These behaviors
could be attributed to the relative newness of traffic laws or general inexperience of drivers in China, compared to other
countries with more mature driving histories and where individual drivers gain experience at a young age, and commonly
drive many miles per year. However, more recent work on ‘‘scrambling’’ behaviors in Beijing, such as failing to give right of
way to cars or pedestrians to gain an advantage (Shi, Bai, Tao, & Atchley, 2011) suggests that many of these unlawful behav-
iors are choices made by drivers that have stronger cultural rather and skill-based underpinnings.
This suggestion is supported by examination of economic, governance and cultural values that are related to crash rates
(Table 2). Özkan and Lajunen (2007) have shown GDP to be negatively correlated and the Hofstede (2013) culture dimension
of uncertainty avoidance to be positively correlated with crashes. Gaygısız (2010) found that all Governance Indicators
(World Bank, 2013), and the Schwartz (2004) values of intellectual autonomy and egalitarianism are negatively correlated

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
4 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Table 2
Overview of economic, governance and cultural values for China, Japan and the United States. Correlations with
crash risk are shown in parentheses for reference.

China Japan US
Economic dataa
GNP per capita (IMF, 2012) US$ ( ) 6076 46,736 49,922
Governance indicators (%tile)b
Voice and accountability ( ) 4.7 77.9 85.9
Political stability ( ) 25 79.2 63.7
Government effectiveness ( ) 60.7 87.7 88.6
Regulatory quality ( ) 45.5 78.2 91.9
Rule of law ( ) 41.8 86.9 91.1
Control of corruption ( ) 30.3 90 85.3
Hofstede culture dimensionsc
Power distance 80 54 40
Individualism 20 46 91
Masculinity/femininity 66 95 62
Uncertainty avoidance ( ) 30 92 46
Long term orientation 118 80 29
Schwartz values dimensionsd
Embeddedness (+) 3.74 3.49 3.67
Hierarchy (+) 3.49 2.65 2.37
Mastery (+) 4.41 4.06 4.09
Intellectual autonomy ( ) 4.18 4.78 4.19
Egalitarianism ( ) 4.23 4.36 4.68
Harmony 3.78 4.21 3.46
Affective autonomy 3.3 3.76 3.87
a
International Monetary Fund (2012).
b
World Bank (2013).
c
Hofstede (2013).
d
Data provided by Türker Özkan.

with risk and the values of embeddedness, hierarchy and mastery are positively correlated with risk. With the exception of
uncertainty avoidance, China’s scores all predict higher crash risk. This represents a challenge for traffic safety professionals
and it may help explain the differences in safety outcomes between countries like China and its neighbor, Japan, where cul-
tural values contribute to lower crash rates.

2.2. Japan

2.2.1. Historical overview

Like China, Japan has a long history and distinct cultural traditions, and like the Unites States, it has a long automotive
history. The entry of Japan into the culture of traffic started in the late 19th century Meiji era, with a period of intense indus-
trialization. Japan’s left-hand system of driving may have its origins in samurai culture, where left passage was required
(http://www.2pass.co.uk/japan.htm). This system was later extended to traffic of other sorts and bolstered by early British
influences on those systems. The first Japanese automobile manufacturer (Hatsudoki Seizo Company, later to become Dai-
hatsu) was established in 1907, the same year as the first reported death by an automobile crash. The early influence of util-
itarian and military influence on early Japanese traffic culture is evidenced by the 1918 ‘‘Military Vehicle Subsidy Law’’ which
mandated conversion of automobile manufacturing from civilian to military use during times of war.
Following World War II, a steady increase in drivers and vehicles was also associated with a steady increase in crashes
and fatalities. Much of this rise could be attributed to the lack of traffic safety facilities including road construction, signal
controls and sign posts. Crash statistics reached a peak in 1970 when 16,765 persons were killed and 981,096 persons were
injured. Traffic safety was recognized as an urgent social issue, and the ‘‘Traffic Safety Policies Law’’ was enacted in 1970.
Based on that law, Fundamental Traffic Safety Programs have been developed every five years since 1971. The target of
the first program was to halve the pedestrian fatalities of about 8,000 persons in 1970 by 1975. Compared with US and Eur-
ope, the rate of pedestrian fatality was high in Japan because of the poor separation between cars and other traffic users
(Hayakawa, Fischbeck, & Fischhoff, 2000a, 2000b). As a result of the first program, the pedestrian fatalities decreased to
3732 persons in 1975. Following programs had own targets. The number of overall fatalities decreased to 4612 in 2011. De-
spite of the decrease in the number of fatalities, the number of crashes and injuries increased during 1980s and 1990s, peak-
ing at 952,191 and 1,183,120, respectively in 2004. The Road Traffic Law was partially revised in 2004 to prohibit cell-phone
usage while driving, and injuries crashes have declined steadily since that period.

2.2.2. Structural overview

During the Meiji period, modernization of transportation infrastructure was focused on rail and sea systems. The excel-
lent Japanese system of roads, built to carry people and horses, was not modernized until after World War II. An economist

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 5

hired to help modernize the road system noted ‘‘The roads of Japan are incredibly bad. No other industrial nation has so com-
pletely neglected its highway system.’’ Only about one-quarter of the national highways were paved by the mid 1950s (Kim-
ura & Maeda, 2005). Part of this slow development is attributable to cultural values that placed a heavy emphasis on
harmonizing roadways with the surrounding environment, with time and effort spent on landscaping and the choice of sce-
nic locations for service areas.
The modern traffic structure has enjoyed a very large portion of the national budget, leading to numerous projects. Fol-
lowing the 1956 Japan Highway Public Corporation Law, projects have been coordinated by public corporations and roads
were largely developed as toll systems (Mizutani & Uranishi, 2006). From the 1960s to the 1970s, public works expenditures
increased threefold. The trend continued into the 1990s when construction was about 9% of Japan’s GDP. Despite complaints
that many projects are unnecessary, the byproduct of spending has been development of one of the most extensive and tech-
nologically advanced systems of roads in the world.

2.2.3. Cultural analysis

Table 2 reveals Japan is one of the most uncertainty avoidant countries, and one where drivers recognize they are embed-
ded in a collective experience and should strive to be harmonious with their environment (low mastery score), all factors
that predict lower crash risk. Studies of traffic culture in Japan have noted that Japanese driving behavior is strongly influ-
enced by a culture of low risk tolerance. The dimensions underlying perception of risk (dread and unknown risk) in Japan are
similar to other countries (Hinman, Rosa, Kleinhesselink, & Lowinger, 1993; Kleinhesselink & Rosa, 1991, 1994), but Japanese
drivers view automobile crashes with more dread than drivers in the United States (Hayakawa et al., 2000a). Japanese drivers
overestimate the risk of crashes and they view those crashes as more likely to be serious and to be their fault, compared to
their US counterparts who have higher estimates of the economic cost of crashes. These patterns of risk perception lead the
Japanese to buy insurance to mitigate the costs to others for a crash, while US drivers buy insurance to mitigate their own
cost (Austin, 1996). It is unclear how much of these effects are due to less optimism on the part of the Japanese (Heine &
Lehman, 1995; Svenson, Fischhoff, & MacGregor, 1985; Weinstein, 1980) and how much is due to perception of real envi-
ronmental risk. Hayakawa et al. (2000b), suggest that the dread of Japanese drivers for harming others may be a function
of the higher rate of crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists compared to US crashes that are more typically between
automobiles.
Compliance with laws and the wording of laws suggest a traffic culture emphasizing responsibility. Drivers seem very
willing to comply with laws such as seatbelt use, with over 97% of drivers observed wearing seatbelts (National Police
Agency and Japan Automobile Federation, 2012). Drunk driving penalties extend beyond drivers, to include people that pro-
vide a drunk driver with a car, alcohol or ask for a ride from someone who is drunk. More drivers in Japan would like
strengthened penalties (52%) and increased police control of traffic (43%) than increased education efforts (39%) (Central Re-
search Services, 2010), which suggests a very different set of values compared to a traffic culture that emphasizes freedom,
such as in the US.

2.3. United States

2.3.1. Historical overview

The unique combination of large distances to travel and natural resources uniquely suited to internal combustion led the
US to become the premiere car culture of the 20th century. Among the three countries discussed here, the US has the most
extensive history of a strong relationship to the automobile. Much has been written of this relationship. For the current pur-
poses, it is most important to emphasize the history of traffic safety in the US One aspect that is often confusing to safety
professionals outside of the US is that traffic safety regulations are written and enforced at a local and state-by-state basis.
The US federal government may set guidelines such as speed limits or seat belt laws and encourage states to adopt those
guidelines by tying highway funding to their adoption, but states can choose to set their own policies.
The local/state approach to traffic safety was the model in the US until the mid 1960s. The National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 was enacted to establish a national program to reduce crashes and fatalities on US roadways
(see Mashaw & Harfst, 1990, for a summary of this history). This act came in response to dramatic increases in fatality rates
on US roads as more drivers entered US roadways and the newly developed US highways system (see Section 2.3.2). The book
‘‘Unsafe at Any Speed’’ (Nader, 1965) and subsequent Congressional hearings highlighted the problem and led to regulation
of automotive manufacturing and additional laws to establish a variety of national traffic safety regulatory agencies such as
the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.

2.3.2. Structural overview

The long history of traffic culture in the US, and the great need for efficient transportation across state boundaries has also
produced a long tradition of research and work on traffic safety. For example, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
for Streets and Highways was first established in the US in 1935 as a common guide to best practice for traffic control (Haw-
kins, 2010) despite a lack of federal regulations. However, like the emphasis at a state level on safety noted previously, many
structural development efforts in the US was a function of a patchwork of local interests, and driven by economic need rather
than driver necessity.

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
6 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Early efforts to expand roads were made by industries that benefitted from increased automotive use, such as automotive
manufactures, petroleum groups, and companies associated with road building (Seiler, 2008, p. 99). Car clubs also lobbied on
behalf of drivers seeking more reliable routes to enjoy ‘‘motoring.’’ Countervailing transportation interests such as rail, nau-
tical and pipeline owners lobbied against a national road structure but the passage of the Federal Highway Act of 1956 began
a state-funded project to develop a national highway system. As opposed to toll-based efforts in Japan, the US effort was
funded through taxes on gasoline and other taxes making the majority of US roads free for US drivers to use. The Federal
Highway Act helped to produce the largest highway system in the world, and encouraged a rapid growth of automotive cul-
ture in the US.

2.3.3. Cultural analysis

Table 2 suggests economic, government and value factors generally support a culture of safety. But the high individualism
score suggests an additional value must be considered. As an early ad noted, ‘‘To own a Ford car is to be free to venture into
new and untried places.’’ This is US traffic culture in one word: ‘‘freedom.’’ ‘‘Cars and freedom’’ are the two things that a re-
cent car commercial boasts America got right. American studies professor Cotton Seiler (2008) suggests that might correct. In
‘‘Republic of Drivers: A Cultural History of Automobility in America’’, Seiler suggests the automobile is one of the most
important symbols of freedom and agency in the US Advertisements aimed at expanding the republic of drivers targeted
groups such as women (1920s) and African-Americans (1950s) with promises that cars would enhance their ability to be
free in the country in which they were already citizens. Even today the ritual of obtaining a license to drive is a rite of inde-
pendence for an American youth.
The connection of driving and freedom influences more than just the ability to move geographically, it also affects traffic
safety. One of common responses by US drivers to proposals for new traffic safety laws is that laws impinge upon their per-
sonal freedom. For example, the failure to address the distracted driving issue by state legislatures is based on a belief that
those laws will be unpopular even though they can produce safety benefits. Yet, unlike in Japan, US lawmakers have been
more aggressive requiring safety features in cars to protect drivers, resulting in greater improvements in injury rates among
US drivers. This emphasis on regulation of vehicles (US) versus drivers (Japan) will be an important insight into developing a
full understanding of safety culture across the two countries and present different models for how developing traffic cultures
such as China might proceed.

3. Discussion

China, Japan, and the US have three distinct histories of traffic culture and very different levels safety on their roads today.
Table 3 summarizes the analyses. China is the newest entry into the world of automobility and their safety record has im-
proved rapidly, though Chinese roads remain very risky places for drivers and pedestrians. Japan has a long history of driving
culture, with some of the most modern roads and lowest fatality rates. The US has the most mature traffic culture, with
excellent roads and vehicle safety requirements, but it has a mixed safety record compared to other countries and given
its resources.
The origins of the successes and failures in each country have contributions across all three factors examined. However,
there is evidence that reaching the best outcomes in traffic safety requires the right cultural conditions to be present. China
has made amazing strides toward improving its culture of traffic safety, moving from laws that governed the flow of traffic
from an efficiency standpoint toward laws that try to reduce driver and pedestrian risk. China has come a long way from the
late 1970s when headlights were banned in Beijing (Hessler, 2010, p. 29). The road system is still under development and

Table 3
A summary of traffic safety trends and historical, structural and cultural factors for China, Japan and the US.

China Japan US
Current fatality 83.61 6.15 12.77
ratea
Trends 1990– Fourteen-fold increase in vehicles Fatalities down by 67% Largest number of registered vehicles
2010 Large improvements in per vehicle risk Crashes and injury rate steady Fatality and injury rate down about
50%
Historical factors New driving culture Established driving culture Established driving culture
Recent traffic safety laws Acceptance of national traffic safety Some resistance to new traffic safety
programs laws
Structural factors New road construction programs Modern (toll-based) highway system Modern (publicly funded) highway
system
Mixed vehicle safety Fewer car safety laws More car safety laws
Cultural factors Highest risk tolerance Low risk tolerance Moderate risk tolerance
Emphasis on getting ahead leads to Emphasis on protecting others Emphasis on personal freedom
‘‘scrambling’’
a
Per 100,000 registered vehicles.

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 7

this will continue to contribute to safety issues in the future. The most intractable factor, however, is that Chinese drivers,
cyclists and pedestrians seem to be far more tolerant of risk than citizens in other cultures and they also seem to place more
emphasis on ‘‘getting ahead’’ of others in traffic, leading to a willingness to break traffic rules (Shi, Bai, Tao, & Atchley, 2011;
Shi et al., 2010).
A culture that tolerates risk will have difficulty achieving the highest levels of traffic safety. A comparison of Japan and the
US reveals how risk tolerance and traffic safety culture interact. Japanese drivers dread traffic crashes more than their US
counterparts and are especially concerned about the costs to others. This is consistent with the Japanese interdependent con-
cept of the self versus the US concept of the self as independent (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). This may contribute to the fact
that the Japanese seem more willing to accept rules and enforcement than US drivers, who place a premium on driving as an
expression of freedom. One example of how this impacts safety is seen in the complete ban on cell phone use while driving in
Japan in 2004, while the US still struggles with this issue.
However, the culture of dread and willingness of drivers to accept safety mandates has produced action to reduce fatality
rates in Japan to among the lowest in the world, but similarly large gains have not occurred in crashes or injuries. While US
drivers place a premium on personal freedom, and thus resist mandates or enforcement aimed at driver behavior, they do
seem willing to promote requiring greater safety standards for vehicles than their Japanese counterparts. Thus, while the US
fatality rate is high compared with Japan or other countries, the injury rate compares favorably and the injury rate has de-
clined at the same rate as the fatality rate.

4. Conclusions

Summarized, China, Japan, and the US each have unique cultural lessons for traffic safety. China has the challenge of a
large population that produces intense competition, promoting a culture that is willing to accept risk. However, risky behav-
ior and traffic produce unsafe consequences. Citizens in China may be more willing to accept mandates regulating behavior
and a grand cultural shift may be more possible than in other countries, though this is debatable given governance metrics. It
is clear great gains in safety have been produced over a very short period of time, which may present China with a path to-
ward developing a safety culture. In the US, a culture of personal freedom makes it more difficult to develop and enforce
safety laws and to develop a safety culture. Change can occur but it is slow, an example being the slow changes in drunk
driving laws and attitudes. A willingness to develop and implement technical solutions is a benefit. But like Japan, who have
the inverse issue of a willingness to limit driver freedom for increased safety but seem more reluctant to regulate vehicle
safety, going the last mile toward the best safety culture and achieving the greatest gains may be difficult. Further work
assessing the relative contributions of these factors toward driver and policymaker decision-making will be important as
we work toward building the most effective safety culture.

Acknowledgements

The first author would like to thank Kevin Fearn and Deborah Trombley of the National Safety Council for their assistance
with US traffic safety statistics.

Appendix A

Excerpts of definitions of the cultural dimensions are provided here for readers not familiar with them.
Hofstede dimensions (http://geert-hofstede.com/dimensions.html).

A.1. Power distance (PDI)

‘‘This dimension expresses the degree to which the less powerful members of a society accept and expect that power is
distributed unequally.’’

A.2. Individualism versus collectivism (IDV)

‘‘A society’s position on this dimension is reflected in whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of ‘I’ or ‘we.’’’

A.3. Masculinity versus femininity (MAS)

‘‘(Masculine) (s)ociety at large is more competitive.’’ ‘‘(Feminine) (s)ociety at large is more consensus-oriented.’’

A.4. Uncertainty avoidance (UAI)

‘‘The uncertainty avoidance dimension expresses the degree to which the members of a society feel uncomfortable with
uncertainty and ambiguity.’’

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
8 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

A.5. Long-term versus short-term orientation (LTO)

‘‘Societies with a short-term orientation generally have a strong concern with establishing the absolute Truth. They are
normative in their thinking.’’ ‘‘In societies with a long-term orientation, people believe that truth depends very much on sit-
uation, context and time.’’

Schwartz dimensions (http://latest-schwartz.wikidot.com/).

A.6. Embeddedness

‘‘(A)ppears in situations where individuals are embedded in a collectivity and find meaning through social relationships,
through identifying with the group, participating in its shared way of life, and striving toward its shared goals.’’

A.7. Intellectual autonomy

‘‘(R)efers to the independent pursuit of ideas, intellectual directions and rights. . .’’

A.8. Affective autonomy

‘‘(R)efers to the independent pursuit of affectively positive experiences such as varied life, pleasure and enjoyment of
life.’’

A.9. Hierarchy

‘‘In hierarchical societies individuals and the resources associated with society are organized hierarchically and individ-
uals within those societies are socialized to comply with the roles assigned to them in the hierarchy and subjected to sanc-
tions if they fail to comply.’’

A.10. Egalitarian

‘‘In egalitarian societies individuals are seen as moral equals and everyone shares the same basic interests as human
beings.’’

A.11. Mastery

‘‘Mastery refers to the situation where individuals value succeeding and getting ahead through self-assertion and proac-
tively seek to master, direct and change the natural and social world to advance their personal interests and the interests of
the groups to which they belong.’’

A.12. Harmony

‘‘Harmony refers to the situation where individuals are content to accept and fit into the natural and social world as they
find it and seek to understand, preserve and protect it rather than change, direct or exploit it.’’

References

Atchley, P., Atwood, S., & Boulton, A. (2011). The choice to text and drive in younger drivers: Behavior may shape attitude. Accident Analysis and Prevention,
43, 134–142.
Atchley, P., Hadlock, C., & Lane, S. (2012). Stuck in the 70s: The role of social norms in distracted driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 40, 279–284.
Austin, L. C. (1996). Consumer insurance decisions: Empirical analysis of four real-world decisions. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Social and Decision
Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University.
Cabinet Office, 2012. White paper on traffic safety in Japan. Cabinet Office (in Japanese).
Central Research Services, 2010. Survey report on traffic safety. <http://www.crs.or.jp/data/pdf/traffic10.pdf> (Retrieved 02.03.13) (in Japanese).
Evans, L. (2004). Traffic safety. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Science Serving Society.
Gaygısız, E. (2010). Cultural values and governance quality as correlates of road traffic fatalities: A nation level analysis. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42,
1894–1901.
Hawkins, G. (2010). The MUTCD: Past, present, and future. Presented at the 2010 ATSSA annual convention and Traffic Expo, San Antonio, Texas, February.
<https://ceprofs.civil.tamu.edu/ghawkins/MUTCD-History_files/MUTCD%20history.2010%20ATSSA.pdf> (Retrieved 06.03.13).
Hayakawa, H., Fischbeck, P. S., & Fischhoff, B. (2000a). Automobile risk perceptions and insurance-purchasing decisions in Japan and the United States.
Journal of Risk Research, 3, 51–67.
Hayakawa, H., Fischbeck, P. S., & Fischhoff, B. (2000b). Traffic accident statistics and risk perceptions in Japan and the United States. Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 32, 827–835.
Heine, S. J., & Lehman, D. R. (1995). Cultural variation in unrealistic optimism: does the West feel more invulnerable than the East? Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 68, 595–607.
Hessler, P. (2010). Country driving: A Chinese road trip. New York: HarperCollins.

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004
 P. Atchley et al. / Transportation Research Part F xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 9

Hinman, G. W., Rosa, E. A., Kleinhesselink, R. R., & Lowinger, T. C. (1993). Perceptions of nuclear and other risks in Japan and the United States. Risk Analysis,
13, 449–455.
Hofstede, G. (2013). Geert Hofstede cultural dimensions. <http://www.geert-hofstede.com/> (Retrieved 15.03.13).
International Monetary Fund (2012). World Economic Outlook. <http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/01/weodata/index.aspx> (Retrieved
02.03.12).
Kimura, F., & Maeda, M. (2005). Transport infrastructure development in Japan and Korea: Drawing lessons for the Philippines. <http://www.bnm.gov.my/
microsites/rcicc/papers/s5.kimura.pdf> (Retrieved 02.03.13).
Kleinhesselink, R. R., & Rosa, E. A. (1991). Cognitive representation of risk perceptions: A comparison of Japan and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 22, 11–28.
Kleinhesselink, R. R., & Rosa, E. A. (1994). Nuclear trees in a forest of hazards: A comparison of risk perceptions between American and Japanese university
students. In T. C. Lowinger & G. W. Hinman (Eds.), Nuclear power at the crossroads: Challenges and prospects for the 21st century. Tokyo: International
Research Center for Energy and Economic Development.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and self: Implications for cognition, emotion and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
Mashaw, J. L., & Harfst, D. L. (1990). The struggle for auto safety. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mizutani, F., & Uranishi, S. (2006). Privatization of the Japan Highway Public Corporation: Policy assessment. In 46th Congress for the European Regional
Science Association, Volos, Greece.
Nader, R. (1965). Unsafe at any speed. New York: Grossman Publishers.
National Bureau of Statistics of China. China Statistical Yearbook (2011). M. Beijing: China Statistics Press (in Chinese).
National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (2011). Traffic safety facts 2010: A compilation of motor vehicle crashes data from the fatality analysis
reporting system and the general estimates system (Report No. DOT-HS811-659). Washington DC: USDOT, NHTSA. <http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/
811659.pdf> (Retrieved 03.03.12).
National Police Agency and Japan Automobile Federation, 2012. National survey on seatbelt usage. <http://www.jaf.or.jp/eco-safety/safety/data/pdf/
sb2012.pdf> (Retrieved 02.03.12) (in Japanese).
Özkan, T., & Lajunen, T. (2007). The role of personality, culture, and economy in unintentional fatalities: An aggregated level analysis. Personality and
Individual Differences, 43(3), 519–530.
Özkan, T., & Lajunen, T. (2011). Person and environment: Traffic culture. In B. E. Porter (Ed.), Handbook of traffic psychology (pp. 179–192). New York:
Elsevier.
Schwartz, S. H. (2004). Mapping and interpreting cultural differences around the world. In H. Vinken, J. Soeters, & P. Ester (Eds.), Comparing cultures:
Dimensions of culture in a comparative perspective (pp. 43–73). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Seiler, C. (2008). Republic of drivers: A cultural history of automobility in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Shi, J., Bai, Y., Tao, L., & Atchley, P. (2011). A model of Chinese drivers’ scrambling behaviors. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43, 1540–1546.
Shi, J., Bai, Y., Ying, X., & Atchley, P. (2010). Aberrant driving behaviors: A study of drivers in Beijing. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42, 1031–1040.
Svenson, O., Fischhoff, B., & MacGregor, D. (1985). Perceived driving safety. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 17, 119–133.
Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806–820.
World Bank (2013). World Bank governance indicators. <http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/sc_country.asp> (Retrieved 15.07.13).
World Health Organization (2013). Global status report on road safety 2013. Geneva: WHO.

Please cite this article in press as: Atchley, P., et al. Cultural foundations of safety culture: A comparison of traffic safety culture in China,
Japan and the United States. Transportation Research Part F (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.01.004