We are accustomed to reading in our newspaper for calls to improve our roads whenever there is a particularly horrific accident involving death. The media always appears to scan the local population and locate a person who is quoted as saying that the location of the accident is a black spot that has needed repair or upgrade for years. Motoring organizations are often asked for an opinion and invariably make a statement that implies that the road design or driving surface were in some way substandard or inadequate.

Our roads and highways are becoming smoother and straighter. Our vehicles more often provide cruise control, and are becoming quieter (virtually silent in electric vehicles). The driver’s focus can easily move to what is inside the vehicle: their phone, iPod, or passengers. Reduced attention is almost inevitable.

This obsession with the quality of our roads and highways is misguided.

Better infrastructure encourages the public to take more risks since they perceive those risks to be lower. While risk-taking may in many other contexts help with personal development, it should not be encouraged in situations that may quickly become uncontrollable and life-threatening.

But better infrastructure also has the effect of making it more difficult for the driver to maintain a sufficient focus on what is happening outside the vehicle. This can result in complacency, but most often plain inattention. Not surprisingly, this is the most common cause of accidents on the road, bar none. The driver is distracted, and does not become aware of a potential problem while there is still time to avoid it. If the ultimate objective is to reduce accidents then the focus should be on assisting drivers to maintain their concentration and respect for the road conditions.

I advocate the deliberate introduction of defects and other devices to deliberately disrupt the driving experience. Defects might be very shallow potholes, and variations in the smoothness of the road surface. Disruptive devices might include coloured markers, possibly raised, to give tactile and visual feedback. They could also be speed limit signs placed at random locations, not only where the speed limit changes.

This disruption should be introduced into our driving infrastructure located at random intervals. A further refinement might be to move the defects or devices regularly so that drivers do not become accustomed to their location.

In our state Tasmania, a rough strip has been placed on the verges of many stretches of highway to alert drivers with a loud noise when they are in danger of leaving the road. This action reflects an acknowledgement by the road management authorities that drivers need help. My suggestion simply takes the rough verges to a more comprehensive solution.

Safe driving relies on the driver giving their driving the attention it deserves. The construction of more perfect roadways and vehicles inhibits this. The introduction of random disruption is one way to assist the driver (and the other occupants of the vehicle) to give the the driving process the attention it deserves, and survive their trip unscathed.