Road Traffic Safety Road Traffic Safety

TNSL10 course
Road Traffic Safety
Basic Concepts,
p , Theories,, Problems and
Countermeasures
Ghazwan Al-Haji, Associate Professor
Department of Sceince and Technology
Linköping University
ghaal@itn liu se
ghaal@itn.liu.se
AGENDA
• Background of my research and collaborative projects.
L t
Lecture
I:
I
• Background of transportation development.
• Overview of road safety problem globally and in Sweden.
• How to compare and measure road safety problem?
• What are the main road safety problems?
Lecture II:
• What are the main countermeasures:
- Traffic
T ffi calming
l i
- 2+1 roads
- Night traffic and safety
- Traffic conflict technique
BACKGROUND OF MY
RESEARCH AND PROJECTS
My Main Research Areas and Projects
My Main Research Areas and Projects
¾ Traffic Safety
¾ Energy
E
Efficiency
Effi i
¾International Projects and Cooperation
EU Cooperation Programmes in Higher Education
Nordplus
EU-Canada
Erasmus (Mundus)
EU-USA
EU
USA
EDULINK
EDULINK
EU-Japan
ASEM-DUO
ASIA-LINK
(Alfa)
EDULINK
Alßan
IAESTE
EU-Australia
EU-Nya
y Zeeland
Lifelong Learning
Programmes, LLP:
Erasmus
L
Leonardo
d d
da Vi
Vincii G
Grundtvig
dt i
Comenius
National programmes (e.g. Sweden)
Minor Field Studies
Linnaeus Palme
Linnaeus-Palme
Visby progarmme (SI)
Source: Internationella Programkontoret
EU Framework Programme (FP7
International Cooperation for
Education and Research
)
Our research and collaborative projects
Latest Projects:
• Joint Curriculum and Research in ITS (JOINITS), funded by the EC.
LiU/ITN is the coordinator.
• The impact of IT technologies in street lighting on traffic safety
safety, funded by
Energimyndigheten.
• Master and PhD degrees in ITS (CITISET), funded by the EC. LiU/ITN is
a partner
partner.
• Curriculum Development in Road Safety, Supported with ICT (SafeIT),
funded by the EC. LiU/ITN is the Grant Holder.
• Advanced
Ad
dC
Curriculum
i l
iin ITS (TransITS),
(T
ITS) funded
f d db
by th
the EC
EC. LiU/ITN is
i the
th
Grant Holder.
• Enterprise-University Partnership, funded by the EC. LiU is a partner.
• Jordan-Sweden Research Links in Pedestrian Safety, funded by
Vetenskapsrådet.
• Linking Road Safety Countermeasures with Energy Efficiency,
Efficiency funded by
Energimyndigheten.
Previous Projects:
• ASNet
ASN t (The
(Th ASEAN Region
R i Traffic
T ffi S
Safety
f t N
Network).
t
k)
• Techtrans (Developing Web-Based Applications and Courses in Road
Safety to Russian Universities).
BACKGROUND OF
TRANSPORATION DEVELOPMENT
Transport has in general terms one primary goal and three restrictions
¾ To move people and goods large distances in a
short time including comfort (primary goal)
¾ Not to cause too many crashes, injuries and
fatalities (restriction)
¾ Not to cause too many environmental problems
(
(restriction)
)
¾ Not
ot to cost too much,
uc , suc
such as road
oad infrastructure,
ast uctu e,
energy consumption, etc. (restriction)
A Sustainable Transport
p
Mobility
and
Safety
Efficient
Sustainable
Transport
Environment
Healthy
Efficient
Economy
Growth of World Population and Vehicle Fleet
Since 1950
(1950=100)
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
Car Usage
Motor Vehicle Fleet
Urban Population
Total Population
2010
TU Braunschweig 4.11.2002
The development of passenger transport by
transport mode in EU 25 1995-2004 (billion pkm)
WHO, 2004
Transport growth in selected
developing countries
Urban Population in Industrial & Developing
Regions, Selected Years
(Figure from Bilham, 2004)
Efficient Use of Urban Roads
ff
f
The amount of space required to transport the 60
persons by different transport modes
OVERVIEW OF ROAD
SAFETY PROBLEM
GLOBALLY AND IN SWEDEN
Traffic Safety Problems
could be indicated by:
• Large
g number of accidents.
• Large number of fatalities and injuries.
• High accident risks.
• Severe accident consequences.
• High cost of road accidents.
Overview of Road Accidents in the World
¾ Killed: 1993 ((500 000),
), 2002 (1200
(
000))
¾ 80% of deaths are in developing countries
¾ Injured: 1993 (15 million), 2006 (>40
million)
¾ Hospitals: 10-15%
10 15% of beds
¾ 1-4% of GNP
Rank Order of Disease Burden for 10 Leading Causes
Disease or Injury
1990
Disease or Injury
2020
Rank
Rank
Lower respiratory
infections (pneumonia)
1
Ischaemic heart disease
1
Diarrhoeal diseases
2
Unipolar major depression
2
Perinatal (newborn)
conditions
3
Road traffic accidents
3
Unipolar major depression
4
4
Ischaemic heart disease
5
Cerebrovascular disease (stroke)
Chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease
5
Cerebrovascular disease
6
Lower respiratory infections
6
Tuberculosis
7
Tuberculosis
7
Measles
8
War
8
Road traffic accidents
9
Diarrhoeal diseases
9
C
Congenital
it l anomalies
li
10
HIV
10
Worldwide Fatality Causes (in per cent)
100
90
Diseases
Traffic Accidents
Other Accidents
Suicide
Homicide
Other causes
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Age
0
05
0-5
5 14
5-14
Source: WHO Statistical Information
15 24
15-24
25 34
25-34
35 44
35-44
45 54
45-54
55 64
55-64
65 74
65-74
Why are road accidents accepted?
¾ We as individuals,
i di id l andd our societies
i i have
h
become
b
very
dependent on road transport, on mobility. And we are
willing
illi to pay a high
hi h price
i for
f not losing
l i it.
i
¾ Although
g the accidents,, injuries,
j
, and fatalities are a veryy
large problem for a country, it is in fact for the individual a
veryy small.
¾ Road accidents take human toll in small and gradually- not
in large scale in comparison with e.g.
e g air,
air ship or rail
accident.
¾ Human
H
b h i
behaviour,
th human
the
h
factor,
f t has
h become
b
an
almost universal explanation for all accidents.
The national cost of accidents is the sum of
five cost components:
1.
2.
3
3.
4.
5.
Property
p y damage.
g
Direct
Administrative costs.
quantitative
q
Lost output
output.
cost
Medical costs.
Human costs of pain and suffering.
Indirect, social and subjective cost
Estimated vehicles and road fatality and regional
distribution
di t ib ti (1999)
Source: A REVIEW OF GLOBAL ROAD ACCIDENT FATALITIES, By G D Jacobs
Evolution of fatalities in EUEU-25
Target - 50% by 2010
Reached 35,000 in 2010 (-30%)
New Target - 50% by 2020
Road traffic deaths by type of road user
Netherlands
Japan
Norw ay
Australia
U.S.A.
Malaysia
Thailand
Colombo, Sri Lanka
Bandung, Indonesia
Delhi, India
0%
10%
Pedestrians
WHO, 2003
20%
Bicyclists
30%
40%
50%
60%
Motorized 2-wheelers
70%
80%
90%
Motorized 4-wheelers
100%
Other
Development of fatalities in Sweden
Accident Statistics in Sweden
Development Sweden
Killed in Sweden 1935 - 2004
1 400
1 200
5 000 000
killed
cars
4 500 000
4 000 000
1 000
800
3 500 000
3 000 000
2 500 000
600
400
2 000 000
1 500 000
1 000 000
200
500 000
0
0
1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
270 ffatalities
t liti iin Y
Year 2010
year
20
04
20
02
20
00
19
98
19
96
19
94
19
92
19
90
19
88
19
86
19
84
19
82
19
80
19
78
19
76
19
74
19
72
19
70
19
68
19
66
19
64
19
62
19
60
19
58
19
56
number of c
children killed an
nnually
Child
Children
killed
kill d in
i traffic
t ffi in
i Sweden
S d 1956-2005
1956 2005
140
120
100
80
60
7-14 år
0-6 år
40
20
0
HOW TO MEASURE AND
COMPARE ROAD SAFETY
PROBLEM?
Objective, perceived, and nominal
traffic safety
• Objective safety – measured with
accidents rates
• Perceived safety – felt by road users
• Nominal safety
y – measured in
comparison with the design and
operational safety standards on roads
roads,
vehicles and management.
34
Nominal safety
e.g. Road
Star rating
map
The RAP Inspection Device (RAPID)
Specially equipped vehicles video the road network
Elements on a section of road
Main objective measurments
• Traffic Risk in terms of fatalities
per n
number
mber of vehicles
ehicles or n
number
mber
of kilometer driven
• Personal Risk in terms of fatalities
per population
Better Enforcement and
Engineering
Education
ITS
Developing
Countries
Etc
Etc..
Developed
Countries
International comparison
DIFFICULTY OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF ACCIDENTS DATA
ACCIDENTS DATA
Road
Traffic
Accident
Database
Fatal Accidents
Fatality
Serious Injury
Accidents
Serious
Injury
victim
Slight
g Injury
j y
Accidents
Slight
I j
Injury
victim
Vi ti di
Victim
dies within
ithi 30 days
d
off accident
id t
Victim given at least 7 days of medical
leave
Victim given at 3 days medical leave
No injury
Accidents
No one suffers any injury
CASUALTY-RELATED
CASUALTY
RELATED
ACCIDENT-RELATED
Sources of road accidents data
•
Police accident data
•
Hospital data
•
Insurance data
•
Vehicle companies
•
Special
Spec
a surveys
su eys
Types of data
• Where accident occur
• When accident occur
• Who was involved and injured
• What was the result of accident
• Why and how accident occur
Reporting rate level in a country
A = number of casulaties reported to the police only
B = number of casulaties reported to the police and hospitals
C = number of casulaties reported to the hospital only
m
Missing
Police
A
Elvik and Truls (2004)
Both
B
Hospital
C
Reporting level=
(A+B)/(A+B+C)
Causulaty under reporting
Reported and estimated casualties in
ASEAN countries (2003)
Recommendations for European average correction factors
for unreported road accidents.
Bickel et al 2006
Collection of datadata- accident form
The information sent to the national database via
network computers
p
or as hard copy.
py
STRADA Overview
National Accident Database
htt //
http://www.strada.se
t d
Accident description
http://www.strada.se
WHAT ARE THE MAIN ROAD
SAFETY RISKS AND
PROBLEMS?
Road Safety Main Components
Road
Driver
Vehicle
Areas with large safety potential in
Sweden:
• Speed:
p
57% of traffic volume above speed
p
limits in 2004 (VV Konsult, 2004).
• Safety belts: About 6% of car drivers do
not wear safety belt (VTI, 2010)
• In-depth
I d th studies
t di show:
h
about
b t 34% are
unbelted in fatal accidents
• Drink driving: In-depth studies show: 16%
of killed drivers had a BAC level over
0 2%
0.2%.
• …..
Need a look under the water
Obvious problems: Speeding, Alcohol
and driving,
g usage
g off seatbelts and
helmets, rescue services, poor road
safety data, VRUs, etc.
Problems need deeper analysis:
T ff legislations,
Traffic
l
l
enforcement,
f
vehicle and road inspection,
education, etc.
Hidden problems: Traffic
management system is slow
or non-existent, national
road safety
f y programme,
p g
, lack
of know-how, etc.
Shared Factors in Road Accidents
A typical accident theory
• A cleaner has a hole in his bucket.
• As a result he spills water onto the floor.
• A second employee is rushing and fails to
see the water spot.
• As
A a resultlt h
he slips
li and
db
bangs hi
his h
head
d on
the floor.
Domino Theory
1932 First
Fi t Scientific
S i tifi Approach
A
h to
t Accident/Prevention
A id t/P
ti
- H.W.
HW
Heinrich
Risk Homeostasis Theory (Risk
Compensation))
Compensation
•T
Traffic
ffi System
S t
has
h their
th i own target
t
t
risk
• Drivers reduce (compensate) risk
with
ith more cautious
ti
b
behavior
h i if
Perceived Risk > Target Risk
• They change behavior towards more
d
dangerous
if
Perceived Risk < Target Risk
Some people are risk takers and
Some
people are risk takers and
some people are risk avoiders.
Target Risk
Accepted
p
Risk
Perceived Risk
Why do People Engage in Risky Behavior (Accepted
Risk) in Traffic
1. They don’t perceive the risk well
2 Th
2.
They do
d perceive
i the
th risk,
i k b
butt also
l perceive
i
some benefit from taking the risk e.g. time,
money, look
l k good,
d personall satisfaction.
ti f ti
etc.
t
Risk Homeostasis
• The supported examples:
• The average speed of people wearing seat
belts was higher than those who did not
• In a Munich study, half a fleet of taxicabs were
equipped
equ
pped with a
anti-lock
oc b
brakes
a es ((ABS),
S), while
e the
e
other half had conventional brake systems.
The crash rate was the same for both types
yp of
cab, and the study concluded that drivers of
ABS-equipped
q pp cabs took more risks,, non-ABS
drivers were said to drive more carefully since
theyy could not rely
y on ABS in a dangerous
g
situation.
Perceived and Accepted Risks
Sweden changed to driving on the right on 1967. It
resulted in 17% less road deaths in the first year
y
Perceived risk ↑, Accepted risk ↓,
=> Risk-taking behavior ↓
After introducing free-market economy in Poland in
late 1980s, the crash rates increased by 30 percent.
Accepted risk ↑, perceived risk ⎯
=> Risk
Risk-taking
taking behavior ↑
Risk homeostasis
• The idea of risk homeostasis has
generated criticism
criticism. Some critics say
that risk homeostasis theory is
contradicted by car crash fatality rates.
These rates have fallen after the
introduction of engineering measures
e.g. seatt belt
b lt laws.
l
• Question:
Do Safer and New Cars = Dangerous Drivers?
Hadden’’s Matrix
Hadden
P C
Pre-Crash
h
Travelers
Vehicle
Road +
Environment
C
Crash
h
Attitudes
Driver Skills
Alcohol Use
Enforcement
Ed
Education
ti
Lighting
Vehicle Size
Braking
Vehicle Weight
P tC
Post-Crash
h
Seat Belts Use
Traveler’s Age
H l t U
Helmets
Use
T
Traveler’s
l ’ Health
H lth
First Aid Training
Fuel System
Fire risk
Vehicle Design
Road
oad Design
es g
Weather
Speed limit
R dM
Road
Maintenance
i t
Lighting
Pedestrian facilities
Roadside
oads de
Hazards
Fixed Objects
Rescue
escue Response
espo se
Availability of
Medical Services
Congestion
The Size of Road Safety Problem
= Exposure*Risk*Consequence
Accident Accident
Risk (A/E)
Exposure (E)
Injury Risk (I/A) “Consequences”
Consequences
(I) E*A/E*I/A
(I) = E*A/E*I/A
Source: Rumar (1999)
The traffic safety situation - Annual number of
kill d car drivers
killed
di
in
i different
diff
t age groups in
i
Sweden 1992
Source: Nilsson (1999)
Risk description using different exposure units,
person kilometres
kil
t
or hours
h
in
i traffic,
t ffi for
f road
d
users, Sweden 1992
Source: Nilsson (1999)
2 out of 3 accidents happen in urban roads
2 kill
killed
d off 3 are VRUs
VRU iin urban
b roads
d
Fatalaties
U b roads
Urban
d
Accidents
70%
30%
Rural roads
70%
30%
Pedestrian fatality Risk as f ti
function of the f th
impact speed
impact speed
Speed and Risk p
of involvement i
in a casualty lt
crash
How to understand the danger of high speeds?
A head-on
h d
collision
lli i iin 90 kkm/h
/h corresponds
d tto a
free fall of 25 m and if the speeds are 110 km/tim
a free fall of 43 m.
How to understand the danger of high speeds?
• A pedestrian hit by a
car travelling 50 km/h
can be compared to a
free fall of 10 meters
• If the
th speed
d off the
th car
is 30 km/h it
corresponds to a free
fall of 3 meters
The concept of “safe speed” in Sweden
75
Alcohol Risk of crash crash
involvement
• About 25% of all road fatalities in
Europe are alcohol related
whereas about only 1% of all
kilometres driven in Europe are
driven by drivers with 0
0.5
5 g/l
alcohol in their blood or more.
Age
g and driving
g experience
p
Accident peaks
Age
Parents
Pedestrians
Cyclists
Mopeds
Mainly knowledge and skills
79
Road user behaviour in DCs‐‐ Examples
Road user behaviour in DCs
Studies showed that:
• 12 and 41 % of the drivers in selected DCs
violated
i l t d a red
d lilight.
ht The
Th corresponding
di fifigure
in Sweden is 0.1-0.2%.
• Road markings and signing may be less
effective in some DCs than in the developed
countries because of differences in driver
education and behavior.
Poor road standards
Poor vehicle safety
Poor Road User
Behaviour
Thank You