ROAD SAFETY

A road safety vision is a description of a desirable state in the future, based on a theory of how the different components of the traffic system interact or must interact. It is formulated as a long-term goal without a specified timeframe which may only be attained through large efforts over a long period of time.

However, a vision gives directions to road safety work and generates reflexion on what improvements are necessary in order to approach the desirable state proclaimed by the vision. If there is commitment and funding, a road safety vision directs road safety actions and forms the basis of road safety plans and programmes. Sustainable Safety in the Netherlands and the Swedish Vision

Zero are the best known examples of road safety visions, which also have been adopted by other countries. In both visions, the core concept is to change the road traffic system into one which eliminates all known opportunities for human error and reduces the physical damage in crashes which are bound to occur. Because the vision is shared by all the stakeholders, responsibility for road safety is also shared between road users, system designers, road authorities, car manufacturers, etc., i.e. all those who are directly or indirectly involved in road traffic.

 

Vision Zero in Sweden

_ What is it about? In 1997, the Swedish Parliament adopted the Vision Zero, a bold new road

safety policy based on four principles:

– Ethics: human life and health are paramount; they take priority over mobility and other

objectives of the road transport system.

– Responsibility chain: the providers, professional organisations and professional users are

responsible for the safety of the system. The users have the responsibility to follow rules

and regulations. If the road users fail to follow rules and regulations, the responsibility falls

back on the providers of the system.

– Safety philosophy: humans make errors; road transport systems should minimise the

opportunity for error and the harm done when errors occur.

– Driving mechanisms for change: providers and enforcers of the road transport system must do their utmost to guarantee

the safety of all citizens and each of the participants should be ready to change to achieve safety.

_ Who is involved? The Swedish Road Administration (SRA) has the overall responsibility for road safety within the road

transport system. According to the principles of Vision Zero, all other stakeholders in the field of road transport also have

responsibilities for ensuring and improving road safety.

_ How effective and costly is it? Vision Zero is estimated to achieve a possible reduction in the number of deaths by a quarter

to one third over a ten-year period (1). The adoption of Vision Zero in Sweden helped in developing further research

and implementing a new system design. It helped in the implementation of the upgrading of single carriageways

to 2+1 lanes roads with central cable barriers to shield drivers from opposite traffic.

Road safety programmes and targets

A road safety programme is more specific and covers a shorter timeframe than a road safety vision. Preferably, it is based on a road safety vision. A road safety programme describes goals and principles for the organisation of road safety work and specifies the actions or spearheads for the next five to ten years. A road safety programme also defines the responsibilities and provides funding and incentives for the implementation of effective safety measures.

Road safety targets are an important part of a road safety programme. Targets give a precise, quantitative description of what is to be attained, and within what timeframe. Targets are usually formulated with a timeframe of up to 10 years. Targets should be challenging, but also attainable. Targets are usually set in terms of crash victims (e.g. the number of fatalities in a country or the number of serious injuries amongst children). But it is also possible to set additional targets in terms of intermediate variables related to road behaviour that has a proven relationship with crash risk (e.g. the number of speed limit violations on rural roads; or the percentage of the driving population driving under the influence of alcohol). The success of road safety programmes and targets in improving road safety lies in the fact that they increase obligation and commitment to road safety goals, and that they provide the basic conditions for achieving these goals. Commitment and the political will to actually direct road safety work towards the safety goals can be further improved by linking these goals to goals in other areas of transport policy, such as environmental goals.

Efficiency Analysis

Efficiency analyses are conducted to evaluate the effects of road safety measures or programmes at different stages of their implementation. A distinction can be made between impact assessment and cost benefit analysis. Impact assessment refers to the use of information about the expected effect of a measures, e.g. on the basis of evaluations of measures elsewhere. Impact assessments provide a scientific basis for deciding whether or not to implement a particular measure. Software tools are in use with which the effects of all types of measures on the numbers of crashes and on crash

costs can be estimated. Cost-benefit analyses are also conducted prior to the implementation of specific safety measures and used in decisions about which measures to implement. The costs of implementing a measure are compared to the expected (monetary) benefits of preventing crashes and saving casualties. Thus, by selecting the most cost-effective measures in a particular area, larger safety effects can be achieved with the same funds. It is also possible to include benefits other than safety ones in costbenefits analyses (e.g. related to environment and mobility).

Systematic assessments and evaluations contribute significantly to road safety by supporting the implementation of the most effective safety measures. The greatest challenge is to assure the actual use of the results of the analyses in the decision process. The EU project ROSEBUD provides more details about efficiency analyses and an overview of the costbenefits of a wide variety of measures 1.

As a complement to the assessment of the expected impacts and cost-efficiency analysis, an evaluation of the real-size effects of measures, obtained after implementation, makes it possible to adjust measures which are found not to be as effective as expected. This type of ‘a posteriori’ impact assessment would need to be an integral part of road safety programmes.

The Finnish TARVA programme

_ What is it about? In Finland cost efficiency analyses are common in road safety decision

making. A special software programme, called TARVA, is available as a tool.

TARVA contains crash data for all roads in Finland. It is used to estimate changes in

the numbers of injury crashes and fatalities of infrastructure measures on the Finnish

road network. It can also calculate the monetary benefits and costs. TARVA has been

in operation since 1994. The programme is flexible and easy to apply. Evaluations are

regularly carried out.

_ Who is involved? TARVA is used by the Finnish road authorities on both the national and regional level. It may be transferred

to other countries if information is available on infrastructure, crashes, costs of measures, and if validated crash

models are available.

_ How effective and costly is it? TARVA improves the efficient use of resources by supporting the implementation of the

most effective measures on those roads where they are most useful. Costs include the costs for data administration,

research and development (e.g. estimation and validation of crash models), and administrative procedures.

_ More information? www.tarva.net/tarvaintro.asp

Resource allocation processes

Resource allocation is crucial for the effectiveness of road safety programmes. Therefore, the resource allocation process always needs to be part of a road safety programme. Conversely, resource allocation processes should be linked to specific goals for road safety in order to achieve a maximum benefit of the funds which are allocated in the process. Preconditions for resource allocation processes are a long enough timeframe and sufficient budgets. It is also essential to conduct follow-ups in order to ensure the effectiveness of the measures which have

Promising practice

The Belgian Road Safety Fund

_ What is it about? The Belgian Road Safety Fund is a good example of how ‘more safety for

less money’ can be put into effect. There are two features of this measures that are specifically

promising for the transfer of this measure to other countries: the use of revenues of

fines for road safety objectives, and the possibility to call back spent money that cannot be

justified. The fund receives money from fines paid for traffic offences and gives financial support

to police services for road safety actions (enforcement), that focus on speeding, drink

driving, seatbelts, heavy goods transport, dangerous parking, aggressive behaviour in traffic,

and weekend crashes. Expenses have to be justified, and money that has not been spent

or accounted for can be returned. The Belgian Road Safety Fund was implemented in 2004.

_ Who is involved? The fund can be used by the federal police and local police forces and is managed by the Federal

Ministries of Mobility and Internal Affairs.

_ How effective and costly is it? The fund has lead to improved and increased enforcement activities for types of traffic

behaviour that are known to contribute to severe crashes. Activities are based on action plans, and the quality and effectiveness

of these plans must be evaluated. The measure is cheap as it finances itself. The way money is divided is still

a point of discussion.

_ More information? www.mobilit.fgov.be

been funded, and to avoid misuse of funds. Potential drawbacks of such schemes can arise if they lead to increased use of a specific type of safety measure at the cost of other (and maybe more effective) measures. Such side effects may be avoided by stipulating that the provision of resources be linked to the existence of adequate framework conditions and depend on the types of measures they are used for. Not reaching objectives should have consequences in order to assure the effective use of resources and to stimulate evaluation activity.

trisusilo.hidayati