1 TASK GROUP’S O7 DRAFT STATUS REPORT QUESTIONNAIRE 1 CATHERINE LERTA ROAD DIRECTORATE (D1)...

1

TASK GROUP’S O7DRAFT STATUS REPORT

QUESTIONNAIRE 1

CATHERINE LERTA

ROAD DIRECTORATE (D1)

HELLENIC MINISTRY for the ENVIRONMENT,

PHYSICAL PLANNING & PUBLIC WORKS

CEDR - PG ROAD SAFETY, Vienna, Austria, 27-28.04.2006

2

BACKGROUND INFORMATION


The Task group O7 circulated two questionnaires:

• Q1, attempting to depict the framework in which Road Safety initiative is handled in Member States and

• Q2, an Excel spread sheet dealing with the benefits in accidents/fatalities/injuries of specific investments made in bends, junctions etc and trying to calculate their cost effectiveness.

QUESTIONNAIRE 1

Only 9 countries answered, among EU - 25, which are (in alphabetical order): Belgium (Wallonie), Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

3

1. Do you have a national goal for road safety?


COUNTRY NO YES

Belgium Wallonia

Reduce the number of fatalities by 2 between 2001 and 2010

Denmark Achieve a 40 % reduction in fatalities and severe injuries in the year 2012 compared to 1998. This target was put forward by the Danish Road Safety Commission in their 2000 Action Plan and has subsequently been endorsed by the Government. This means that fatalities are to be reduced to maximum 300 and severe injuries to maximum 2.443 per year in 2012.

4



COUNTRY NO YES

France France does not have a road safety plan with pre-defined targets in terms of fatalities to be reached within a time period. The approach is: a sliding (annual) action plan issued and monitored by an inter-ministerial committee for road safety.

5



COUNTRY NO YES

Germany Goals:• Protect human lives,

• Mitigate the consequences of road accidents,

• Reduce economical losses caused by road accidents.

The German Government supports the European reduction target to halve the number of fatalities in Europe until 2010.Apart from the national goals there are some road safety programmes set up by the Bundesländer (Federal States) which define safety goals for their area of responsibility (e.g.) Brandenburg’s goal is to reduce death toll on it’s roads by 5% every year.

6



COUNTRY NO YES

Greece 50% reduction in deaths till 2010, in relation to 2000.

Iceland A new road safety plan(=it is a part of the transportation plan.

The goals and objective:In 2016, the number of killed in traffic in Iceland per 100 thousand inhabitants shall not be higher than in countries with outstanding traffic safety (f.ex. now Great Britain, Sweden and Netherlands have the lowest numbers, i.e. five year average 1999-2003).The number of killed and seriously injured in traffic in Iceland shall decrease by 5% per year (on the average) until 2016.

7



COUNTRY NO YES

Ireland ‘Road To Safety Strategy 2004 to 2006’. Main target = 25% reduction in road collision fatalities by the end of 2006 over the average annual number of fatalities in the 1998 – 2003 period.

The Netherlands

For 2020:580 fatalities (-45%), 12.250 hospital treated injuries (-34%), In European top 4

The United Kingdom

40% reduction (33% for trunk roads and motorways in recognition of existing good performance) in NUMBER of killed and seriously injured by 2010 ; 10% reduction in RATE of slight injury accidents by 2010.

8

2. Do you have national traffic safety action plans based on these goals?


COUNTRY NO YES

Belgium Wallonia

Black spots School areas Worksites signing

Denmark National action plan “Every traffic accident is one to many – Road safety starts with you”. Special attention to 4 focus areas:

accidents with too high speeds, accidents in junctions, accidents with alcohol and accidents involving cyclists.

Since 2000,more detailed road safety action plans by the Road Directorate, the regional and many local road authorities – as well as legislative and enforcement measures by the Government.

9



COUNTRY NO YES

France No, but action concerning the national road network is under considerationThere are ‘regional safety layouts plans’ (PRAS), funded on accident data analysis, which allows to localize sites of the network to deal with and determinate priorities. This process is to be replaced soon by another one called “SURE proceeding” (for “users’ safety on existing roads”).

10



COUNTRY NO YES

Germany Five priorities:Improve considerateness in road traffic (e.g. by campaigns, simplification of traffic rules)Protect vulnerable road users (e.g. by improvement of traffic education in schools, funding of enlargement/upgrading of the bicycle network, initiating research on pedestrian friendly deformable zones for new cars)Minimize risks for novice drivers (second stage of novice drivers training, accompanied driving at 17) Reduce exposure of heavy goods vehicles (HGV) (expansion of control) Improve safety on rural roads (e.g. city bypass programme, safety audits, research on safe overtaking, recommendations on obstacle free zones, etc.)

11



COUNTRY NO YES

Greece National Strategic Plan, where the Hellenic Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works’ Action Plan for the Road Safety is included. The latest includes Actions for road infrastructure.

Iceland Key problems: 1.Speeding and lack of use of seat-belts,

2.Lack of use of seat-belts in buses,

3 Use of alcohol and drugs when driving,

4. Black spots in the road system e.g. narrow bridges –and lack of guardrails,

5. Foreign drivers that are unfamiliar with the circumstances on Icelandic roads,

6. Accidents caused by animals.

12



COUNTRY NO YES

Iceland

(continue)

On-going and intended action:Increased enforcement (by increased police surveillance). It is also intended to introduce safety cameras to more extent in Iceland in the next four years, The ongoing systematic approach to the elimination of black spots will be continued in the next four years, Videos describing Icelandic road conditions are being made and shown to tourists,Standards are being reviewed, More fences are being put up in order to decrease the no. of accidents caused by animals running into the road.

13



COUNTRY NO YESIreland Contracting out speed camera programme

for 11m speed checks /annum, RBT 450 /annum, Targets on speed belts (90% front & 60% rear by 2006) and Accident remedial measure/traffic calming schemes.

The Netherlands On European level: Vehicle technology and measures (active and passive),

On National level: Road pricing, Improvement of locations with cost-effective infrastructure measures, Adequate maintenance of the national roads,

14



COUNTRY NO YESThe Netherlands (continue)

On National level (continued): Improvement of the education-level of the young new drivers, Safety campaigns, Improving safety level of vehicles by existing controls,

On Regional level: Special Regional traffic safety plans based on the same goals as the National goals, Improvement of locations with cost-effective infrastructure measures, Programs for improving the behavior of the drivers, Enforcement on speeding, red light negation, helmet, safety belts, aggression and alcohol, Improvement of safe freight transport

15



COUNTRY NO YES

The United Kingdom

This tackles all the “Es” of road safety: evaluation, education, engineering, enforcement, encouragement.

16

3. Do you have special traffic safety schemes? (e. g. a black-spot scheme)


COUNTRY NO YES (How do you identify the locations? How do you give priority to the locations? Etc)

Belgium Wallonia

Black Spots Scheme = concentration of accidents on links of 500 meters

Denmark 2 different methods are used to identify black spots:

1. Accident model method;

2. Accident density / rate method

France First stage = priority-parts of routes to deal with are identified by means of accidents data (number and gravity). As indicator the ‘Potential safety profit’ is calculated.

Second stage =a detailed safety study (called "diagnosis") is done in order to understand what is going wrong and suggest right measures . Actions supposed to be the most efficient and fast to be done (in a very short term) are realized by priority.

17




Germany 2 ways of identifying dangerous road sections:

1. “Traditional” Black Spot Management,

2. Network Safety Management. A Black Spot (also: Black Section, Black

Area) is defined as = a location where the following thresholds are exceeded: 5 Accidents of same type (e.g. single

vehicle accidents) in 1 year, 5 personal injury accidents in 3 years, 3 severe personal injury accidents in 3

years.

18




Germany (continue)

The network safety management (ESN) does not only concentrate on black spots but on the whole road network.

For every section of a road the accident cost densities under consideration of the traffic volume are calculated and compared to basic values. The difference between the actual densities/rates and the basic values forms the so called safety potential. The higher the potential of a road section the higher is the priority for improving this particular section. A ranking is formed according to the safety potential.

19




Greece Since there has not been any systemic/scientific action for black spot treatment in the last decade, the proposed procedure for identifying locations includes four(4) stages/phases.:Phase A = Identification of black spots (BS):Phase B = Identification of causation of increased rates of accidents:Phase C = The goal is to prioritize the implementation of intervention action in the investigated B.S,

Phase D.= Evaluation of the BS manag. procedure.Iceland Locations are identified by analysis of accident maps

and inspection in the field. If possible, prioritization in the black spot area is based on first year rate of return.

20




Ireland Minimum of 240 Accident Remedial Measure schemes, 20 Higher Cost Remedial Schemes, and 60 Traffic Calming Schemes over 3 year period of Strategy. Schemes identified from accident clusters maps and accident database

The Netherlands

Identifying locations: By using Risk management (number of injuries per million vehicle kilometer) on comparable stretches of road or junctions. The locations will be researched, which type of measure is adequate to solve (a part of) the problem.

Priority to the measures: The costs of the measure in relation to the results (in terms of reducing the number of fatalities/injuries) gives the ranking of the measures.

21



COUNTRY NO YES (How do you identify the locations? How do you give priority to the locations?

Etc)

The United Kingdom

Bids are made and ranked into priority

order based on rate of economic return.More details can be found in “Value Management of Local Network Management Schemes” paper of Highways Agency.

22

4. Do you have funds allocated specially for road safety?


COUNTRY NO YES (How are such funds determined?)

Belgium Wallonia

A special budget for Black Spots Operations, another one for School Areas Operations, a third one for General Safety Operations Determined by politics

Denmark Funds for road safety measures on national roads are allocated to the Road Directorate by the Ministry of Transport and Energy. The Government allocates funds for traffic legislation and enforcement activities (these are governed by the Ministry of Justice) – and to a lesser extent for road safety campaigns, research, etc. At lower levels funds for road safety measures on roads are allocated by the respective responsible regional and local councils. Some funds are earmarked directly for road safety activities.

23




Denmark (continue)

Others like those allocated to maintenance activities and minor works can through proper influencing of projects indirectly be used to improve road safety, e.g. regarding provision of road markings and signs, other road equipment such as traffic islands and road lighting, types and layout of junctions, etc. The level of funding (per year and long-term) depends on the different authorities’ political priorities and resources

24




France On the national road network, the general directorate of roads (DGR) reserve specific funds on its budget for safety fittings. For a 30,000km length network, these funds were of (about) 46M€ for 2005 plus 20M€ given by local authorities (under contracts between the government and regional councils). After having decentralized 18,000km of national roads last 1st of January, the 2006 national budget is 25M€ plus 8ME from local authorities (regions) for 12,000km left. These funds, mostly those which are consecrated to modernize (development investments), maintain and operate the network as far as these one contribute to sustain traffic safety as well.

25




Germany There are funds allocated for road safety relevant activities, especially under the Programme for Improving Safety of Road Traffic. The funds are administered by the BMVBS and determined by the Federal Government Budget.

Greece According to data of 14 Nov 2005, about 92.685.876 € in total are being allocated for Road Safety Actions, having the greater amounts allocated for: short term interventions in dangerous spots (14.128.054,26 €, ),short term interventions in national road network (31.153.765 €), checking of driving behavior with electronic means (cameras) (12.115.000 €)

26




Iceland About 19,3 million Euros will be spent directly on road safety in the period 2005-2008. The costs of major changes in infrastructure are not included in this sum but such changes most often lead to huge improvements in road safety. The Icelandic Parliament has (in the spring of 2005) agreed upon a new road safety plan. The road safety plan is a part of the transportation plan.

Ireland €21m allocated in 2006 for Road Safety Infrastructure schemes.

Nationals Safety Council allocated €5m for media, €7m for Medial Bureau and Funds also allocated to

Police for Speed Camera Programme.Infrastructure schemes are developed and costed by local authorities, prioritized by National Roads Authority.

27



COUNTRY NO YES (Specify/ How are such funds determined?)

The Netherlands

On National level there is a fund for measures on National 1*2 roads for the period 2006-2010. On Regional level they can use: a part of their budget they get from the National Government and a part of their regular budget. On Municipal level they can use: a part of their own budget and sometimes subsidy from the Regional Government.Several indicators (number of inhabitants, etc.) are used for these funds (from National to Regional). For the use of the funds on Regional level there are other rules which can differ between several regions

The United Kingdom

By working back from 2010 targets to work out how much money is needed to achieve results.

28

5. How do you choose between different road safety initiatives?


COUNTRY by economic calculations (e.g. first year rate of return)

Other ways: specify

Belgium Wallonia

Barely, although generalisation of this criteria is under consideration)

politics

Denmark Road safety measures are usually prioritised based on calculations of the first year rate of return - that is the saved accident costs per year compared to the construction / implementation costs. The Road Directorate maintains estimates for transport economic unit costs, hereunder the costs for different accident types and severities of injuries. (see www.vejsektoren.dk.)

Another used method to prioritise road safety measures is via the individual projects’ cost effectiveness. This is given by the construction / implementation cost per saved accident. The accidents costs are thus not included in the calculations.

29



COUNTRY by economic calculations (e.g. first year rate of

return)

Other ways: specify

France For each road project, a socio-economic assessment is made a priori in order to decide to realize the project or not. This assessment includes a pricing of accidents effects, aggregated with other effects like time benefit or environmental issues.

For actions on the improvement of existing road network, the safety potential (cost of avoidable accidents) is firstly determined, then the itineraries where major gain can be obtained are analyzed. After a thorough analysis of the dysfunctions, action guidelines are derived, and finally corrective measures proposed. Those measures are then analyzed from a programming point of view, and decided, taking into account the cost the benefice for road safety.

30



COUNTRY by economic calculations (e.g. first year rate of

return)

Other ways: specify

Germany The BMVBS decides about the budget allocation considering identified road safety problems, recent developments in road safety and the potential efficiency of the proposed initiatives. Proposals for initiatives are usually made by road safety organizations like the German Road Safety Council. Within this process scientific consultation is provided by the Federal Highway Research Institute.

31




Other ways: specify

Greece There are no national data from B/C studies, since this was the first Operational Programme for Road Safety, so the choice of Actions has been based on already gained experience and according to other countries’ programmes.

Iceland By first year rate of

return if possible.

32




Other ways: specify

Ireland By economic calculations.

The Netherlands Cost-effectiveness is a very important way to determine which measure should be taken or not.

Not only the economic calculations are important, but also the possibility to do something that organizations are very enthousiastic.

33




Other ways: specify

The United Kingdom

A whole procedure is followed about a Scoring Method for Safety and Economy Schemes. The philosophy of the scoring system for Economy and Safety schemes is that the main measure of value for money will be the First Year Rate of Return (FYRR).

34

1. All countries consider Road Safety as a main issue and almost all have set National Goals in order to reduce fatalities. Nevertheless, the targeted time limit extends from year 2010 to year 2020.

2. Almost all countries have set National Traffic Safety Plans.

3. All countries have special traffic safety schemes. The idea of a black-spot scheme exists in every country, even if it is not called this way or it is handled in a slight different way.

4. All countries have special funds allocated for Road Safety, although the amounts should be considered in relation with National Annual budgets and GDP.

5. Economic calculations (first year of return) seem to be the major contributing factor to evaluations, with socio-economic assessments being the second. Nevertheless, decisions are also driven by politics or other countries’ experience, in few Members.

6. Generally, non all of the countries are in the same level of progress concerning Road Safety initiative and expertise.


CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS

NOTE: The comments expressed in this presentation are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Task Group O7 which the author belongs to.

35

Thank youfor

your attention


36

The floor is open for discussion


Date post:	27-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	clinton-sparks
View:	222 times
Download:	3 times

1 TASK GROUP’S O7 DRAFT STATUS REPORT QUESTIONNAIRE 1 CATHERINE LERTA ROAD DIRECTORATE (D1)...

Documents