Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom.
Physical Activity for Health Research Centre (PAHRC), Institute for Sport, Physical Education and Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 Sep 2;22(1):120. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01213-8.
In 2016, large-scale 20 miles per hour speed limits were introduced in the United Kingdom cities of Edinburgh and Belfast. This paper investigates the role that scientific evidence played in the policy decisions to implement lower speed limits in the two cities.
Using a qualitative case study design, we undertook content analysis of a range of documents to explore and describe the evolution of the two schemes and the ways in which evidence informed decision-making. In total, we identified 16 documents for Edinburgh, published between 2006 and 2016, and 19 documents for Belfast, published between 2002 and 2016.
In both cities, evidence on speed, collisions and casualties was important for initiating discussions on large-scale 20 mph policies. However, the narrative shifted over time to the idea that 20 mph would contribute to a wider range of aspirations, none of which were firmly grounded in evidence, but may have helped to neutralize opposing discourses.
The relationship between evidence and decision-making in Edinburgh and Belfast was neither simple nor linear. Widening of the narrative appears to have helped to frame the idea in such a way that it had broad acceptability, without which there would have been no implementation, and probably a lot more push back from vested interests and communities than there was.
2016 年,英国爱丁堡和贝尔法斯特两个城市实施了大规模的每小时 20 英里限速政策。本文旨在调查在这两个城市实施更低限速政策的决策过程中,科学证据所扮演的角色。
本研究采用定性案例研究设计,对一系列文件进行了内容分析,以探索和描述这两个方案的演变过程,以及证据如何为决策提供信息。总共确定了 16 份爱丁堡的文件,这些文件发表于 2006 年至 2016 年之间,19 份贝尔法斯特的文件,发表于 2002 年至 2016 年之间。
在这两个城市,关于速度、碰撞和伤亡的证据对于启动大规模 20 英里限速政策的讨论至关重要。然而,随着时间的推移,这种说法发生了转变,即 20 英里限速将有助于实现更广泛的愿望,而这些愿望都没有确凿的证据支持,但可能有助于中和相反的论调。
爱丁堡和贝尔法斯特的证据与决策之间的关系既不简单也非线性。叙事的扩大似乎有助于以一种广泛接受的方式来构建这一理念,如果没有这种接受,就不可能实施限速政策,而且可能会引发更多既得利益群体和社区的强烈反对。