Suicide by crashing into a heavy vehicle: Focus on professional drivers using in-depth crash data

Objective: Road traffic suicides typically involve a passenger car driver crashing his or her vehicle into a heavy vehicle, because death is almost certain due to the large mass difference between these vehicles. For the same reason, heavy-vehicle drivers typically suffer minor injuries, if any, and have thus received little attention in the research literature. In this study, we focused on heavy-vehicle drivers who were involved as the second party in road suicides in Finland.

Methods: We analyzed 138 road suicides (2011–2016) involving a passenger car crashing into a heavy vehicle. We used in-depth road crash investigation data from the Finnish Crash Data Institute.

Results: The results showed that all but 2 crashes were head-on collisions. Almost 30% of truck drivers were injured, but only a few suffered serious injuries. More than a quarter reported sick leave following their crash. Injury insurance compensation to heavy-vehicle drivers was just above €9,000 on average. Material damage to heavy vehicles was significant, with average insurance compensation paid being €70,500. Three out of 4 truck drivers reported that drivers committing suicide acted abruptly and left them little opportunity for preventive action.

Conclusions: Suicides by crashing into heavy vehicles can have an impact on drivers’ well-being; however, it is difficult to see how heavy-vehicle drivers could avoid a suicide attempt involving their vehicle.     

Environmental impact assessment of infrastructure projects: a governance perspective

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been promoted as an instrument for preventive environmental management in construction projects, but its performance in safeguarding the environment through influencing project decision-making is questioned. This paper probes the underlying reasons from a governance perspective as an important supplement to the regulatory and technical perspectives. A framework, with process integration, professional governance, and public engagement being its key components, is proposed to analyze the governance arrangements that enable or inhibit the effective functioning of EIA, based on which a comparative study of three infrastructure projects in China, the United States and Finland was conducted. The results reveal that, while the level of process integration and public engagement of EIA determines the degree to which EIA influences project decisions, it is the professional governance that controls the accountability of EIA. The paper has implications on institutionally where efforts should be directed to improve the performance of EIA.