Transcript A_Chapter1Ogden

The Nature and Dimensions of
the Road Safety Problem
Hossein Naraghi
CE 590 Special Topics
Safety
January 2003
Introduction

About half a million people die and 10-15
million people are injured in traffic
crashes across the world each year.

Road trauma is an important dilemma for
industrial and developing countries.

Travel is one of the most dangerous
activities faced by the people of industrial
and developing countries.
Introduction (Cont.)
 Road
Safety problem must be
considered with reference to:
•Economic,
•Humanitarian and
•Public Health frameworks.
Mobility Concerns

Since movement creates kinetic energy,
the energy exchanged can be damaging
to all involved human and properties in
time of a collision.

By replacing the animal drawn transport
with motorized transport, the speed and
mobility increased.
Mobility and Risk

Increasing mobility caused more risk.

Faster and more travel created more risk.

More exposure and traveling with higher
speed were the major reasons that death
and injury on the roads became an
important issue during the twentieth
century.
Statistics

The major cause of death for people aged 5 to
35 years in Australia is the road system, which is
about 3 percent of all deaths.

Majority of the crash victims in Australia are
young people.

The loss of productivity is substantial as the
result of reduction in the length of life.
Cost of Road Crashes

Australia Bureau of Transport and Communications
Economics estimated the cost of the road trauma
to be $4,900 Million in 1993, which is about 1.6
percent of the Australia Gross Domestic Product
(GDP).

UK estimated economic cost of crashes was 1.7
percent of GDP in 1994.

In US, the economic cost of crashes was between
1.0 – 1.5 of GDP at the same time.
Crash Cost (Cont.)

All these cost figures emphasize the
economic significance of road trauma.

There is an strong economic certainty for
tackling this problem.
Contrast of Social and Personal perception

The road crash problem has perceived
differently from social and personal point
of views.

Although the economic and public health
issues resulting from road crashes are
very significant, the individual perceive
the hazard extremely small.
Example

As an example estimated, the probability
of being killed in a road crash in Australia
is:
• One in one thousand per year or
• One in one million per trip or
• One in one hundred per life time
Risk Measurement (Cont.)

1. Personal


The personal risk may be measured in
terms of death per vehicle miles
traveled (VMT).
This measure shows an overall safety
improvement in all countries in which
data are available
Risk Measurement (Cont.)

2. Social


The societal risk is measured in terms
of deaths per head of population.
Looking at this measurements for the
same countries show that the rate of
safety improvements is not as great as
it is for personal risk measures.
Risk Measurement (Cont.)

This investigation shows that each mile of
travel has become safer.

Since demand for travel has increased at
the same time, so the death rate per
head of population decreased less
dramatically.
Safety and Mobility

It can be seen that there is an strong correlation
between mobility and safety.

The rate of fatality per VMT, motivate the
decision makers to put more emphasize to
mobility than safety.

The great progress by the medical science on
the other hand saying that road crash has grown
as public health and economic issue.
Safety and Mobility (Cont.)
 There
is actually reluctance to
accept safety measures when
compromising mobility.
Safety in conflict with mobility

The followings are some examples of
conflict between safety and mobility:
Speed Limits
 Motorcycle helmets
 Land Use Planning (e.g. Location and size of

shopping centers)

Street Layouts which restrict access
Safety in conflict with mobility(Cont.)

Minimum age to get a driver license

Restriction on novice drivers
( Alcohol and
Night time driving)



Graduated driver licenses
Road humps and other traffic calming
measures
Fully controlled turn phases at traffic
signals
Safety in no conflict with mobility

When safety is not in conflict with mobility
it is easier for acceptance unless encounter
with oppositions regarding cost and
inconvenience.

Some safety measures may not have been
adopted since travelers perceive very low
level of risk.
Safety in no conflict with mobility (Cont.)

The following are some safety measure
examples which are not in conflict with
mobility:






Airbags
Seat Belts
Vehicle Safety Improvements
Safer Highway Furniture (e.g. safer utility poles)
Improved Emergency Services
Passenger Facing Rewards
Future Objectives of Safety and
Mobility

The effort for the future is to use the
advanced technologies which can enhance
safety and mobility simultaneously.

Safety measures provided by emerging
technologies will likely be readily accepted
if provided at reasonable cost.
Future of Safety

The following are some examples of
the future safety measures:
Fatigue Detectors
 Night time Vision Enhancement
 Smart Car that Drive Itself
 On-Board Navigation System

Safety Goal

It is a big tension on transportation
professionals to give importance to either
safety or mobility.

The goal is to promote both safety and
mobility simultaneously.

In fact having safety and mobility at the
same time is not always possible.
Transportation Engineers

Ezra Hauer Suggested that:
“Perhaps we transportation engineers can not act in
good faith as the custodian of traffic safety because the
goal of safety and efficiency are too often in conflict”
He also emphasize the engineer’s responsibility
about safety and concludes:
“Within limits, highway traffic engineers can make roads
safer or less safe so we must know the safety
reprecautions of our choices”
Conclusion

The road trauma is an important economic and public
health problem in industrial and developing societies.

Suffering from road crashes is perceived differently from
social and personal point of views.

From societal viewpoints, there are very important
economic and humanitarian reasons to consider this
problems seriously.

From personal point of view, there is a very small risk of
being in a traffic crash. Therefore safety measures are not
as important as mobility objectives from personal point of
view.
Acknowledgements

K.W. Ogden. Safer Roads: A Guide to Road
Safety Engineering. Institute of Transport Studies,
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University.
Melbourne, Australia