BOB ROAD SAFETY PROJECT DELIVERABLE 4 FINAL REPORT · BOB Road Safety Project, Deliverable 4, final...

BOB ROAD SAFETY PROJECT DELIVERABLE 4 FINAL REPORT

Submitted to: European Commission Submitted by: NEA Transport research and training Reference: R20030124/57346000/AEN/GJO Status: final Rijswijk, The Netherlands, July 2003

© The use of figures and/or text from this report is permitted if the source is clearly mentioned. Copying of this report is only permitted with written permission from NEA.

BOB Road Safety Project, Deliverable 4, final report

CONTENTS Page

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 7

1.1 General introduction....................................................................................... 7 1.2 Objective of the pilot project.......................................................................... 8 1.3 Process followed............................................................................................. 9 1.3.1 General remarks ............................................................................................. 9 1.3.2 Concerning the Road Safety Pilot ................................................................ 10 1.3.3 The Workshop of 18th November 2002 ........................................................ 12

2 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................. 15

2.1 Bench marking in relation to road safety ..................................................... 15 2.1.1 Figures from different sources ..................................................................... 15 2.1.2 Definition: “Comparisons”........................................................................... 16 2.1.3 Definition: “Conclusions” ............................................................................ 17 2.2 Bench mark clusters ..................................................................................... 18 2.3 Interaction of benchmarks ............................................................................ 19 2.4 Strings of benchmarks .................................................................................. 20 2.5 Approach taken............................................................................................. 21 2.6 Structure of the report................................................................................... 22

3 ROAD SAFETY STATISTICS .......................................................... 25

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 25 3.2 Road safety in Europe in general.................................................................. 26 3.3 Road safety in European countries: Development ....................................... 32 3.4 Countries in focus......................................................................................... 33 3.5 Road safety: The Netherlands ...................................................................... 33 3.6 Road safety: Poland...................................................................................... 38 3.7 Road safety: France ...................................................................................... 41

4 ROAD SAFETY POLICY- PROFESSIONAL DRIVER TRAINING .. 47

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 47 4.1.1 Definitions .................................................................................................... 47 4.1.2 Highlights on EU legislation on driver training ........................................... 48 4.1.3 Summary of EU legislation with relevance to road safety ........................... 51 4.1.4 Certificate of Professional Competence ....................................................... 55 4.1.5 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 55 4.1.6 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 56 4.2 Country reports............................................................................................. 57 4.2.1 Policy framework France ............................................................................. 57 4.2.1.1 General information ..................................................................................... 57 4.2.1.2 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 61 4.2.1.3 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 62 4.2.1.4 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 63 4.2.2 Policy framework Denmark ......................................................................... 64

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 3


4.2.2.1 General information ..................................................................................... 64 4.2.2.2 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 65 4.2.2.3 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 66 4.2.2.4 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 67 4.2.3 Policy framework Germany ......................................................................... 67 4.2.3.1 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 67 4.2.3.2 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 68 4.2.3.3 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 69 4.2.4 Policy framework Sweden............................................................................ 70 4.2.4.1 General information ..................................................................................... 70 4.2.4.2 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 72 4.2.4.3 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 73 4.2.4.4 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 74 4.2.5 Policy framework The Netherlands.............................................................. 74 4.2.5.1 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 74 4.2.5.2 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 76 4.2.5.3 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 76 4.2.6 Policy framework Austria ............................................................................ 76 4.2.6.1 General information ..................................................................................... 76 4.2.6.2 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 77 4.2.6.3 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 79 4.2.6.4 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 80 4.2.7 Policy framework Ireland............................................................................. 81 4.2.7.1 General information ..................................................................................... 81 4.2.7.2 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 83 4.2.8 Policy framework Czech Republic............................................................... 85 4.2.8.1 General information ..................................................................................... 85 4.2.8.2 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 90 4.2.8.3 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 90 4.2.8.4 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 90 4.2.9 Policy framework United Kingdom ............................................................. 90 4.2.9.1 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 91 4.2.9.2 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ........................................ 92 4.2.10 Policy framework Spain ............................................................................... 93 4.2.10.1 General information ..................................................................................... 93 4.2.10.2 Certificate of professional competence ........................................................ 93 4.2.10.3 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence.............................................. 99 4.2.10.4 Measures after having obtained a driving licence ...................................... 100 4.2.11 Policy framework Poland ........................................................................... 100 4.3 Analysis of the policy................................................................................. 116 4.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 116 4.3.2 Comparison of current data ........................................................................ 116

5 ROAD SAFETY CULTURE............................................................ 125

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 125 5.1.1 Safety culture.............................................................................................. 125 5.1.2 Relation between government and transport sector.................................... 126 5.1.3 General safety performance indicators ....................................................... 127 5.1.4 General remarks ......................................................................................... 128 5.2 Country reports........................................................................................... 129 5.2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 129

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 4


5.2.2 Policy framework United Kingdom ........................................................... 129 5.2.2.1 General policy ............................................................................................ 129 5.2.2.2 Safety culture.............................................................................................. 130 5.2.3 Policy framework Germany ....................................................................... 131 5.2.3.1 General policy ............................................................................................ 131 5.2.3.2 Safety culture.............................................................................................. 134 5.2.3.3 “Greater safety, lower costs”; a BGL and DVR program .......................... 138 5.2.4 Policy framework France ........................................................................... 141 5.2.4.1 General policy ............................................................................................ 141 5.2.4.2 Safety culture.............................................................................................. 141 5.2.5 Policy framework The Netherlands............................................................ 142 5.2.5.1 General policy ............................................................................................ 142 5.2.5.2 Safety culture.............................................................................................. 143 5.3 Conclusion on road safety culture .............................................................. 147

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 151

6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 151 6.2 Strings of benchmarks: level 1 and 2 ......................................................... 151 6.3 Strings of benchmarks: level 1,2 and 3 ...................................................... 154 6.3.1 Casualties, road safety policy and road safety culture of Germany ........... 154 6.3.2 Casualties, road safety policy and road safety culture of the U.K.............. 155 6.4 Road Safety Transition Curve .................................................................... 156 6.5 Road safety policy: observed vs. theoretical .............................................. 160 6.5 Road safety policy: observed vs. theoretical .............................................. 161 6.5 Final remarks and recommendations.......................................................... 162

ANNEX 1 COM(2001) 56 FINAL/COM(2001) 573 FINAL ............................. 165

ANNEX 2 BEST PRACTICE IN HUMAN FACTORS (IN SAFETY CULTURE)................................................................. 169

ANNEX 3 SURVEY CIECA: FIGURES.......................................................... 177

ANNEX 4 LEGISLATION GERMANY ........................................................... 185

ANNEX 5 ASSOCIATION’S REPORTS ........................................................ 189

ANNEX 6 CONTRIBUTING ORGANISATIONS ............................................ 195

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 5


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 6


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General introduction

This is the final report of the BOB Road Safety Project. In this project the benchmarking of road safety has been analysed for three data clusters:

• General statistics on road safety. • Road safety policy in the form of: Professional driver training. • Road safety culture of transport companies.

The current policy on road safety and the past policy on road safety (last 10 years) has been analysed in general. Thereby benchmarking process that has been applied was a mix of the road safety policy and process in general and the two clusters of the project as mentioned above in particular. In total 14 countries have been analysed in more or less detail. However, the actual number of countries studied varies per section of the report. The main cause is the availability of the data in relation to the (limited) resources of the pilot project. A second reason is the fact that in some parts of the report the goal is only to gain a first insight in the complete range by presenting figures on the worst and the best case. In this way an overload of data is prevented and still the full range of possible outcomes will become clear. The organisations that have contributed to the pilot project are listed in Annex 6. In the following sentences, the number of countries studied per section will be discussed in more detail: In the first part of chapter three 13 European countries are studied to gain a first overview on road safety statistics. In the second part of this chapter a more profound statistical overview of three countries is presented. The main goal of this section of the report is to gain additional insight in the availability and usability of road safety statistics without spending too much of project resources. This would be the case if all countries of the first part were studied on this level of detail. In chapter 4 the road safety policy of twelve countries is studied in more detail. Mainly because of the availability of data, in deviation of the previous chapter Belgium and Portugal are not studied in this section of the report. The Czech Republic is added; together with data on Poland information obtained from these countries will provide insight in the road safety policies of future members of the European Union (the main source of data were the project participants themselves). Chapter 5 focuses on road safety culture. Data on this subject was not available but had to be collected additionally. The project team decided to focus this part of the pilot project on four

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 7


“home countries” of pilot project participants. In this way insight was gained concerning the possibilities of bench marking of road safety policy without spending too much of the resources. Some conclusions and recommendations about the total project are given in the final chapter.

1.2 Objective of the pilot project

Road safety is increasingly becoming a priority, not only for national governments but also for the European Commission. The main aim of the road safety policy is to decrease the number of victims on the roads (Europe-wide more than 40.000 fatalities annually) and to lower the costs of road accidents (estimated at about 160 billion Euro including direct and indirect costs). The role of professional transport especially in road safety is interesting for the EU regarding its international aspects and the creation of a level playing field for road transport. Since the market of professional transport has been liberalised, regulations for this sector are being laid down more and more at the European level. Basic rules for driving times, transport of dangerous goods, type approval, driver training and examination, etc. are defined in EU Directives and Regulations. In the White Paper on European Transport Policy for 2010 (COM(2001) 370) the Commission has set the following target: a 50% reduction of people killed between 2000 and 2010. Since most of responsibilities for taking concrete measures fall mainly to national and regional authorities, one of the main instruments for the Commission to reach this ambitious target is the exchange of best practices. This underlines the importance of the BOB Benchmarking project, which assesses the possibilities of the benchmark instrument for improving sustainable transport. Remark:

In this pilot it is clearly shown that setting a target without taking into account other influencing developments, may lead to disappointments. A 50% reduction of number of fatalities without taking into account the (expected) growth of the road traffic may be an example of such a case.

Next to exchanging best practices the Commission has presented the idea of harmonising rules and penalties for international transport on trans-European motorway network in its White Paper. This benchmarking project on road safety in the professional transport sector fits into the aims of the Commission. This project will especially be useful for Member States since the benchmark will provide them with information on the way other EU Member States attack the problems that are, to a large extent, problems common to all Member States. It should give them the necessary ideas and instruments for improving the road safety performance of professional road transport in their own countries.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 8


The objective of this pilot study is therefore: “To assess how far benchmarking can be used to improve policy at national and European level aiming at a higher road safety performance of professional road transport in particular and consequently the sustainability of road transport as a whole”. Two main items were pre-selected: professional driver training (road safety policy) and safety culture. For these two items the benchmarking process has been worked out, with this final report being the outcome of numerous discussions between professionals over the best way to benchmark these two items.

1.3 Process followed

1.3.1 General remarks

When starting a benchmarking project1, the aims and objectives need to be clearly stated at the outset and agreed with the project participants in general and the Senior Managers in particular. As the Public Sector Benchmarking Service documents recommend2, objectives need to be SMART:

• Specific: Expressed so that they are unlikely to be misunderstood • Measurable: Possible to tell whether or not they have been achieved • Action Oriented: Focused on improving a specific process or activity • Realistic: can be tackled with the available time and resources • Time related: can be carried out within a reasonable period of time

It is important to remember that benchmarking alone cannot achieve miracles; it is a tool that should be used as part of an integrated management process focused on continual improvement. There are many variations of the benchmarking methodology but basically all contain the same steps: Planning

• Select subject area to be benchmarked • Define the objective of the benchmarking exercise • Identify potential benchmarking partners • Seek approval commitment and support of senior management • Establish a work plan to determine time-scheduled, tasks and team • Identify data required, sources and appropriate methods of collection

11 BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg GGuuiiddee;; OOGGMM,, SSeepptteemmbbeerr 22000022.. 22 ““BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg ffoorr PPuubblliicc SSeerrvviicceess”” ppuubblliisshheedd bbyy tthhee PPSSBBSS:: www.benchmarking.gov.uk/about_bench www.benchmarking.gov.uk/about_bench

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 9

http://www.benchmarking.gov.uk/about_bench


• Agree on a common code of conduct to ensure all partners have the same expectations and commitment. A basis for this could be the European Benchmarking Code of Conduct.

Data Analysis

• Analysis of data collected: the data collection could help people to work together: however, not all data collected will be used at the benchmarking implementations stage because sometimes it will not be fully comparable between countries or it will be too difficult to allow partners to establish the benchmarking gap and then identify best practice

• Determine the performance gap: that is, the difference between the benchmark for a certain industry or business process and the other organisations being used for a comparison.

• Establish the difference in the process: how does my organisation work? In what way are other organisations better? What can be improved?

• Target future performance: what is the next step? It is essential to establish an Action Plan to enable changes to be made.

Integration

• Communication and commitment • Adjust targets and develop an accepted improvement plan: it is very important to

examine the feasibility of making the improvements in the light of the conditions that apply within your own organisation

At this stage, it is also very important to disseminate results through web sites, brochures, workshops or any other way which allows not only policy makers, operators and experts appreciate the benefits of the benchmarking but also people who are the final consumers of the means of transport and have much to do in achieving a sustainable transport policy. Review/Action

• Develop action plans • Implement and monitor • Review progress and recalibrate/refocus: do not stop once benchmarking is finished but

keep trying to improve performance and adopting best practice; that is the only way to make worthwhile the complex and difficult process of benchmarking.

1.3.2 Concerning the Road Safety Pilot

Three meetings have already taken place in Brussels in regard of the road safety pilot on the 13th of September, on the 9th of November 2001 and on the 25th of January 2002.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 10


The main concerns and ideas of the participants and European Commission are as follows: • It is important to have objectives of common interest for Member States. • The general objective of this pilot should be policy-oriented. • European Commission wants to use benchmarking as a way of defining new tools; it

would like to see if results from the road safety pilot could be used in the future policy-making procedures.

• A key point is identify benchmarks and best practices in road safety and then, finds out why they do better.

• The enforcement of road safety legislation is a topic of common interest • Some participants underlined that they did not have much experience of benchmarking

or that this was the first time that they had participated in such an exercise (CIECA: “Commission Internationale des Examens de conduite automobile”, TISPOL: “Traffic Information System police”)

• Finding research documents and data collection seems to be the very first step for further progress; difficulties of data collection were highlighted. It is necessary to check what data is available in all the participating countries.

• The number of subjects to benchmark must be limited: during the second meeting, the number of areas was reduced to two.

• Lack of manpower despite the willingness of some participants to support the pilot (CEA and UK)

• Difficulties in identifying the right persons to participate in the pilot: responsibility for different aspects of road safety is divided between a number of public authorities

• Distribution of responsibilities between participants should be clearly defined from the onset; for example, organisations such as CEA and TISPOL may be able to provide useful information, but they will probable not be able to participate as full partners

• Terminology with regard to definitions used in the benchmarking exercise must be standardised.

Conclusions There is much concern for the problem of data collection; all participants agree in collecting what is available in order to keep the exercise as simple as possible. There are some organisations as well as some countries in which there is a lack of experience of benchmarking. However, they are interested in learning and helping in the development of the project within their possibilities. For example, the representative from the Ministry of France, brought, together with more than 30 years of professional experience in the field of road safety, several documents and books on figures on good transport practices and TISPOL explained to other participants that they were able to provide additional support and information; TISPOL had organised a conference last October about how to cross borders in a safe way.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 11


Within the pilot it seems to be easier to establish common objectives since the number of different actors is limited: representatives from Ministries of Transport as well as some organisations related to the road sector. At this stage, two topics have already been chosen: the driver training and safety culture of companies; the next step would be to identify available data and provide descriptions of policy in both topics. During the meeting held on 25th January 2002 at the European Commission, there was clear evidence of the valuable collaboration between participants in the two topics chosen for doing benchmarking: driver training and safety culture. Organisations such as TISPOL and IRU, which provided with some information, did not attend that meeting as they considered that at that stage the work had to be done at a national level.

1.3.3 The Workshop of 18th November 2002

In the workshop held on the Working Group of November 18th 2002, the Process was summarized as follows: “Data crunching” It was concluded that the road safety pilot so far, was mainly focussed on the collection and sorting out of data. It was also concluded that this phase consumed too much time. The main result was a lot of figures with the danger in itself of loosing focus. The next phase, inevitably, should be the “hunt” for discriminating factors within road safety figures. Benchmarking Benchmarking in it self is a method of sorting out and presenting comparable figures. Just by presenting road safety figures in a benchmark in an orderly way an insight emerges in possible influencing factors behind, for instance, road casualties. In the road safety pilot the benchmarks suggest a relation between number of casualties and the main qualification of the road safety policy of a certain country. A second benefit of the benchmarking in the road safety pilot was that it became clear again that you (as policy maker in road safety) are not alone and that you don’t have to invent all by yourself. You can learn from others and adapt the new knowledge to your own situation. With this second benefit comes an important side effect of benchmarking. Just the search for figures, and the understanding of possible incomparability, creates a mutual understanding and a shared interest for the subject!

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 12


Objective In short the overall objective of the road safety pilot is to reduce the number of road traffic casualties by determining one or several road safety influencing factors. An important restriction is that these factors have to be related to road safety policy. The Process Strengths As already is stated, the data collection phase consumed (too) much of the project resources, but finally an interesting potential road safety influencing factor is defined. This factor, the main characteristic of the road safety policy of a country in relation to its number of road traffic casualties, will be studied in more detail in the remaining part of the pilot project. One practical benefit is already at hand, there is an thorough overview of road safety state of the art and of initiatives in the countries of the European Union and from some countries outside the Union. Weaknesses The road safety pilot project suffered some serious weaknesses. These weaknesses can been summarised as follows:

• the pilot control could be stronger. Too much of the available resources were consumed by data collection. The weakness was increased by the lack of focus in the first part of the pilot. Of course, when starting up a benchmark, focussing in the very first stages of the process can prove to be dangerous; one may have overlooked essential discriminating factors!

• changing of project participants. Although some changes in project participants in projects that last for quite a long

period, is normal. In the case of the road safety pilot however, it is believed that too much changes have taken place. This will have a strong negative influence on the consistency of the research and therefor on the results of the pilot.

• the one common factor does not exist. From the analysis of the collected road safety data it became very clear that “the one

explains all factor” does not exist. At best a series of factors can by described, all with influence on road safety, but some with positive and others with negative effects. Notwithstanding this conclusion, there may be a factor that explains at least a substantial part of the actual height of the number of road traffic casualties.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 13


Lessons learnt • Continue the process!

Road safety is a never-ending story. At least one result of the road safety pilot is the emerging of a road safety expert’s platform. Please keep this platform operative!

• Implementing of results. The road safety pilot showed “best practices” in road safety. All participants can learn from each other because there is no country with (close to) zero road traffic casualties. Even the best can improve their performance by looking at the others.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 14


2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Bench marking in relation to road safety

In short bench marking is: Analysing of figures (in this case: on road safety) from different sources in a way that comparisons can be made and where conclusions can be drawn.

This definition consists of the following elements:

• Figures form different sources • Comparisons • Conclusions

2.1.1 Figures from different sources

The subject of the project is road safety; so figures on this subject, both quantitative and qualitative, need to be collected from different sources. Road safety can be looked at from a broad range of views, varying from governmental road safety policies to the number of persons actually killed in road traffic accidents. Figure 2.1 shows a first overview of ways to look at figures on road safety. In this table (at least) four lines of approach (“clusters”) can be distinguished. Cluster I: Qualitative figures on the individual level

Every individual (company or person) has its own policy on how to behave in traffic. This policy can be implicit, meaning that the individual acts “automatically”, or explicit, that is: according to a certain plan or prescription. Qualitative figures on the individual level can be collected form questionnaires and interviews in which questions are asked on how the individual (says he) behaves in road traffic.

Cluster II: Quantitative figures on the individual level

Quantitative data on the lowest level can be described as the “track record” of an individual. Although such track records are seldom open for public analysis, some information can be collected from the “bonus/malus3” system commonly used by insurance companies. The system is not only used for private owned cars but also for total fleets of individual companies.

33 BBoonnuuss//mmaalluuss ssyysstteemm== ssuubbttrraaccttiioonn ((bboonnuuss)) oorr aaddddiittiioonn ((mmaalluuss)) ooff tthhee ccaarr iinnssuurraannccee pprreemmiiuumm

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 15


Cluster III: Qualitative figures on the group level One important way in which qualitative figures on the group level show themselves to the outside world is in the form of policies. A policy of a certain group can be described as an agreed way of acting adopted by the participants of this group. Such a policy, especially when adopted by the majority of the participants, is the result of a “general” behaviour or culture. So in the case of road safety, the policies towards road safety instigated by associations and governments, may be the result of road safety culture.

Clusters IV Quantitative figures on the group level

Nearly all data that has been collected and presented in the form of statistics belongs to this cluster. Examples of figures on road safety: • number of road accidents per year per country, • number of people killed in road accidents.

The main characteristic of cluster IV data is that it has a high level of availability but a low level of detail.

From the definitions above, it can easily be seen that cross benchmarking of figures originating form two different clusters, in practice almost impossible. Secondly, performing a benchmark in each of the clusters described gives insight in a broad spectre of the subject studied. Figure 2.1 Information clusters

III IV

I II indivuals (persons/ companies

groups (government/ associations)

qualitative (“policies”)

quantitative (“data”)

2.1.2 Definition: “Comparisons”

The main characteristic of bench marking is the comparison of figures. With comparison, the comparability of the figures used also has to be taken into account. This comparability is one of the most difficult elements to determine. Not only problems arise as a result of the source of the

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 16


data itself being in many cases very diverse, but in some cases even data originating from the same source proves to be incomparable with earlier publications. Besides the actual definition of a figure, the level of detail is of major importance. In general it stands to reason that the lower the level of detail of a figure is, the better the possibilities are to perform a benchmark. In others words, a hierarchy of benchmarks can be distinguished, differentiated in level of detail (see also figure 2.2). Figure 2.2 Hierarchy of benchmarks

comparability ofbench marks

data level

global/rough detailed

2.1.3 Definition: “Conclusions”

The main goal of the study is to determinecasualties. For this reason a road safety beprovide the structure for further future actiopolicies. To be able to determine the best adopted policies in the past and road safety stReferring to figure 2.1 this means a combfigures”. In paragraph 2.1.1 it was concludethan one cluster is almost impossible. Thisdivided.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003

CLUSTER IV

high

CLUSTER II, III

low
CLUSTER I
number ofbenchmarks

the best policy for reducing the number of road nchmark is set up to draw conclusions that can ns in the form of (the adaptation of) road safety policy, insight is sought in the relation between atistics. ination of “cluster III- figures” and “cluster IV-

d that benchmarking figures originating from more means that the road safety benchmark has to be

17


2.2 Bench mark clusters

It was concluded that to be able to perform a benchmark on road safety, the clustering (see figure 2.1) of data has to be taken into account. The main elements of the objective of this pilot study are:

• road safety performance at national and European level • road safety and professional road transport • road safety policy at national and European level.

Road safety performance at national and European level Road safety performance is a clear example of quantitative (statistical) data on groups of people (country level) and therefor belongs to cluster IV. Road safety and professional road transport Although certainly part of the information on road safety in professional road transport is clearly quantitative (cluster II data), a more profound insight in road safety in relation to professional transport can be found in the safety policies they adopt (cluster I). Of course a (long-term) relation can be suggested between the companies safety policies and the number of accidents of these companies. Safety policies translate themselves into (the companies) safety culture when the policy is taken into practice by way of training, monitoring and feed back procedures. Benchmarking safety policy is in fact benchmarking safety culture. Road safety policy at national and European level The last element of the objective of the pilot focuses on the country-level road safety policies. Road safety policy has a multi-focus definition. Road safety can be approached from the point of view of:

• total costs for the community, • official legislation, • immaterial costs for the family, • congestion caused by road obstructions (i.c. accidents), • etc.

As this pilot focuses on policies, it is decided to benchmark the governmental policy on road safety. Again, several points of view can be distinguished. The most important are:

• booking/ticketing policies, • speed reducing policies, • non alcohol/ non drugs policies, • public campaigns, • driver training policies.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 18


Although all measures will affect road safety positively, it is thought that training the actual road user, the main cause of accidents, will prove to be the most effective. However, this statement is not dealt with in the main body of this pilot study. Assuming that improving the quality of the driver is the most effective measure for increasing road safety, how can this element be benchmarked? Most of the basic knowledge and driving ability of the motorised road user, is prescribed in the professional driver training, of which the driving licence is the actual proof. So in monitoring and benchmarking driver training, an insight will emerge on the quality of governmental policies on road safety. Road safety policy is a cluster III benchmark.

2.3 Interaction of benchmarks

In the last paragraph three benchmarks are discussed, namely • road safety culture of transport companies (cluster I benchmark) • road safety policy at national and European level (cluster III benchmark) • road safety performance at national and European level (cluster IV benchmark)

Each benchmark in itself provides insight into the relative position of the entity that is monitored or compared. Although the absolute figures give some information, the main importance of benchmarking is the relative position, mostly depicted as: “better” or “worse”. The next question is of course: “Why ?” To solve the Why-question, or, the reason for the difference, the previously discussed hierarchy of benchmarks may be of help. In other words: the reason why some countries have worse road safety statistics (cluster IV benchmark) may be explained by the safety culture of that country (cluster III benchmark). In retrospect, differences in safety culture may be explained by the (aggregated) safety policy (cluster I benchmark) of particular individuals. In this simplified approach the explanation of differences in the values in a benchmark on a certain level of detail can be found in a benchmark with a degree of detail that is one step higher.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 19


Figure 2.3 Relation between benchmarks of different levels of detail

cluster II benchmark

Xcluster I benchmark

cluster I benchmark cluster I benchmark

cluster I benchmark cluster I benchmark

cluster I benchmark

cluster III benchmark

cluster III benchmark cluster III benchmark

cluster II benchmark cluster II benchmark

cluster IV benchmark

2.4 Strings of benchmarks

As previously described, there is a strong hierarchy in benchmarks. Furthermore, it is possible that the main source of explanation of a “worse” or ”better” position can be found in benchmarks that have a higher degree of detail. It would also appear that the higher the level of detail is of a bench mark, the slighter the chances get of remaining comparable with other high(er) detail benchmarks. Such interrelated sets of benchmarks can be looked at as “strings of benchmarks”. From the example below (figure 2.4) it can easily be seen that, on the top-level benchmarks are comparable, while on the lowest level this is certainly not always the case.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 20


Figure 2.4 An example of a string of benchmarks

Cluster IV benchmark: “Road safety in Europe”

Cluster III benchmark: “Road safety policy per country”

Cluster I benchmark: “Road safety behaviour/culture”

- Sweden: “better” - Portugal: “worse”

- Sweden: “vision zero” - Portugal: “ticketing schemes”

Level of detail

low

high - Sweden: “no alcohol” - Portugal: “usage of seat belts”

2.5 Approach taken

Starting point of the pilot project are the Benchmarking Guidelines4. Leading the benchmarking process are the steps already mentioned in the first chapter of this report. In relation to the Road Safety Pilot these steps are: Step one: Planning

• Selection subject area: road safety, divided in: - road safety policy, - road safety culture.

• Objective of the pilot: assessment in how far benchmarking can be used as a tool to increase road safety (performance).

• Pilot participants: policy-makers, research institutes, (road) transport organisations and other (road safety) experts.

• Identification of data: Statistical (quantitative) data on road safety per country, Qualitative figures on safety policy and culture.

• (Global) Time schedule: Year 1: data collection Year 2: data analysis, conclusions and recommendations.

44 BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg GGuuiiddee ffoorr tthhee TTrraannssppoorrtt SSeeccttoorr;; cchhaapptteerr ttwwoo ooff DDeelliivveerraabbllee 77:: CCoonncclluussiioonnss aanndd

RReeccoommmmeennddaattiioonnss,, DDeecceemmbbeerr 22000022

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 21


Step two: Data Analysis • Analysing of the data collected, description of missing and/or incomparable figures:

determining the benchmarking gap. • Identifying of the best practise and determination of the factors that make the

difference. • Establishment of improvements on base of the best practises finally resulting in an

Action Plan (= see below). Step three: Integration

• “Translation” of the factors that make the difference into adjusted targets and develop an accepted Improvement or Action Plan. These actions have to be performed by each of the project participants and will concern mainly their own organisation.

• Dissemination of results by means of web sites, brochures, workshops, etc. This will allow all people that are interested to benefit from the benchmarking results.

Step four: Review/ Action • Since a benchmarking process is a never-ending story, every now and then the Action

Plans have to be updated and/or upgraded with new information. • Action Plans will have to be implemented and the progress have to be monitored.

2.6 Structure of the report

Overall structure • Chapters one and two present an overview of the objective of the pilot, the methods

applied and the expected results. • Chapter three, four and five present the results of the Data Analysis phase of the pilot

project. • Chapter six concludes the report. In this chapter integration is made of the results of the

data analyses and an overview of the main recommendations is presented. The structure in more detail In this report, the first benchmark presented is a series of cluster IV benchmarks on statistical data on road safety. The results of these benchmarks are listed in chapter three. As stated before, a large part of the explanation of differences in road safety levels can be found in benchmarks of (a one step) higher level of detail, e.g. cluster II or cluster III benchmarks. In this pilot a benchmark on (mandatory) driver training (cluster III) is selected as being a good first explanation of differences in road safety statistics. The results of the benchmark are depicted in chapter four.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 22


On the lowest level of detail a (cluster I) benchmark is performed on safety culture in professional road transport companies. According to the hypothesis that benchmarks of higher detail explain differences in values of benchmarks of (little) lower detail, it is believed that at least a part of the explanation of differences in road safety policies (cluster III) lies in differences in road safety culture (cluster I). The results of this benchmark are presented in chapter five. The results of the benchmarks are integrated in chapter six, in which conclusions and recommendations will be incorporated.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 23


3 ROAD SAFETY STATISTICS

3.1 Introduction

Road safety can be measured with statistical data such as the number of accidents per vehicle type (this is mainly cluster IV data). When using statistical data, especially for benchmarking purposes, some precaution need to be taken. As stated in chapter 2 the use of statistical data has several restrictions. Data about traffic accidents and the severity of an accident only provides insight in the size of problems regarding road safety. It is impossible to determine the circumstances and questions of blame based on these forms of statistical data. Various factors influence the accident chance and the severity such as vehicle related factors, quality of infrastructure and so on. The level of aggregation also requires attention (see also chapter two). For road safety data on a European level, rough data is sufficient. A lower aggregation level, such as road safety comparison between countries requires more detailed information, accompanied with a proportional increase of the benchmark complexity. Regardless of the aggregation level: the recorded data has to be valid and complete. This requires harmonization of the data collection methods and unambiguous determination of the variables. The necessity of valid and unambiguous data becomes clearer when a relatively simple question is formulated regarding data concerning injured people as a result of an accident. What is the definition of an injured person? Is he or she considered to be injured only when the injuries are visible at the accident scene? In practice injuries resulting from accidents are sometimes diagnosed days or even weeks after the event. Do countries include these cases as victims of a traffic accident or not? Remark:

The current data provided by the member states does not answer the above-mentioned questions and this problem seriously hinders the comparability of casualty data originating from different sources (countries).

Bearing in mind the remark mentioned above, this chapter focuses primarily on general road safety in Europe. Statistics of road casualties5 (killed plus injured but not killed caused by road accidents) will be presented. The following paragraph describes the development of road casualties in a group of European countries. Both paragraphs focus on comparison of road accident data between European countries. This is made possible due to the data providing only

55 IItt iiss iimmppoorrttaanntt ttoo bbeeaarr iinn mmiinndd tthhaatt tthheerree iiss oonnllyy aann iinnddiirreecctt rreellaattiioonn bbeettwweeeenn aacccciiddeennttss aanndd ccaassuuaallttiieess.. FFoorr

iinnssttaannccee,, aann aacccciiddeenntt mmaayy ccaauussee zzeerroo uupp ttoo sseevveerraall ccaassuuaallttiieess..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 25


a rough indication of the safety problem. The last paragraph focuses on three countries: The Netherlands, France and Poland. Remark:

Although it is true that the data presented on road accident and road accident casualties indicate certain weaknesses on the item of comparability, but for the time being there is no better information that would enable comparison between countries.

Remark:

The problem of the definition of road traffic “casualties” will not be solved in this pilot study. This may cause some comparability problems for instance on the severity of the injury. Another problem lies in the excluding from the (fatality) statistics of the people who died within 30 days from the accident or the injured whose injuries surfaced only a few days after the accident. It appears that, as far as known, no country has developed an effective way of solving this problem.

Remark:

The main body of data presented, concerns the decade 1990-1999. In the mean time additional data has come available on the years 2000 (IRTAD) and 2000 plus 2001 (project participants; in March 2003 the figures on the year 2002 were not yet available). Were appropriate the further development of road safety figures from 1999 to 2000/2001 will be presented and discussed in short.

3.2 Road safety in Europe in general

The main indicator for road safety in Europe in this paragraph is the number of casualties (= fatalities plus injured but not solely fatalities). Data from the IRTAD database will be used to describe road safety in European countries. Below the figures show for the years 1999, 2000 and 2001 an overall decrease of road casualties although major differences between countries can be distinguished. These differences not only concern the direction of the development form 1999 to 2001, also the actual casualty levels differ substantially. Comparison of road accident casualties’ data from different European countries is possible when the data is linked to the number of vehicle kilometres. The total number of casualties per country can’t be compared, as the number of traffic participants varies. The data has to be recalculated to casualties per one billion vehicle kilometres. Figure 3.1 describes the statistics of fatal casualties for all types of traffic. As the figure shows that Poland, and Portugal of all current EU-members, have the worst scores and Sweden the best.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 26


Figure 3.1 Number of people killed (fatalities) in road accidents per billion vehicle kilometres in 1999, 2000 and 2001 (all sorts of road traffic)

7

8

7

8

9

11

12

13

16

15

16

22

49

7

8

8

9

9

12

14

15

16

18

19

26

57

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

GB

Netherlands

Sweden

Denmark

Finland

Germany

France

Ireland

Belgium

Austria

Spain

Portugal

Poland

199920002001

Source: IRTAD, edited NEA The same figure for professional transport provides a different view (See figure 3.2, also note the different scale on the x-axle). Again Portugal has the highest level of people killed in road accidents in which professional transport is involved; Poland scores much better compared with the same figures from figure 3.1.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 27


Figure 3.2 Number of people killed (fatalities) in road accidents per billion vehicle kilometres in 1999, 2000 and 2001 (professional road traffic)

10

12

13

13

17

17

24

25

41

46

48

65

179

12

13

14

14

18

18

23

25

40

47

52

67

180

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Sweden

GB

Germany

Finland

France

Netherlands

Belgium

Denmark

Austria

Ireland

Poland

Spain

Portugal

199920002001

Source: IRTAD, edited NEA

The United Kingdom has a relatively low number of fatal traffic casualties, but the number of injured people provides a different insight: the number of injured people is relatively large (see figure 3.3). Remark:

Not clear from the statistics is the status of a road traffic casualty. Especially in the case of the United Kingdom there is an apparently high level of non-fatal casualties compared to the number of fatal casualties of that country and compared to the other countries studied. This anomaly may be caused by the differences in definitions for non-fatal injuries. In the United Kingdom information on all injuries is collected while many other countries only record injuries that require hospital treatment - very broadly the U.K. definition of a serious injury. The definitions used in IRTAD address this comparison problem and misapplication of the road casualty data may affect conclusions.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 28


Figure 3.3 Number of people injured (but not killed) in road accidents per billion vehicle kilometres in 1999, 2000 and 2001 (all sorts of road traffic)

155

182

259

295

362

460

462

549

577

763

783

811

810

163

186

273

297

381

466

486

578

607

782

824

861

906

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000

Denmark

Finland

France

Sweden

Netherlands

Ireland

Spain

Poland

GB

Germany

Belgium

Portugal

Austria

199920002001


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 29



Figure 3.4 Number of people injured (but not killed) in road accidents per billion vehicle kilometres in 1999, 2000 and 2001 (professional road traffic)

333

351

477

501

563

657

1040

1134

1310

1493

1635

1953

5460

347

363

497

506

586

684

977

1145

1318

1555

1703

2034

5588

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000

France

Finland

Poland

Denmark

Sweden

Netherlands

Germany

Belgium

Spain

Ireland

Austria

GB

Portugal

199920002001

Source: IRTAD, edited NEA As stated before, the main objective of the pilot is the presentation of an overview on road safety in Europe in general and on road safety statistics in more detail. The identification of differences between countries, benchmarking, is one of the main results. Derived form this main objective, a second target can be set, this is the determination of one or several factors that may cause these differences. Below a possible candidate of such a factor is presented. A more thorough discussion will follow in chapter 6. Example of a road safety-influencing factor: Part of the benchmarking process is “trial and error”. Some examples of this part of the process are depicted below. Concrete causes for the relatively high number of casualties in Portugal and the low level in Sweden are difficult to determine. In chapter 2, about safety culture, it is stated that the government can stimulate or force companies to improve the safety culture. One way of improving the safety culture is by law enforcement. If we look at the differing legislation and law in the countries compared regarding blood alcohol limits or maximum vehicle weight

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 30


(see also table 3.1a), some clues or possible relations between the number of accidents and legislation on, in this case, blood alcohol limits can be found. For instance, Sweden has relatively low casualty rates and a very low blood alcohol rates. On the other hand, Great Britain has relative high limits and still reaches good road safety statistics. More information may be obtained when the relational databases between drinking and driving accidents or gross weight and accidents come available. In some publications it is suggested that there may be a relation between the total volume (or: weight) of a vehicle and the severity of an accident. Table 3.1b shows the maximum allowed vehicle weights per country. As Sweden, Finland and Denmark (and the Netherlands) have the highest maximum weights and the lowest casualty rates, the relation between maximum permitted vehicle weight and severity of accidents (number of fatalities), if any, seems to be negative. In the pilot this relation is not studied in more detail. Table 3.1a Road transport: Blood Alcohol Limits (2001) S GB Fin D F Nl B Dk A Irl E P Blood alcohol limit (grams/l)

0.2 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.5

Casualties/billion veh kms

302 584 191 774 271 370 799 163 825 473 478 834

Source: E.U. Energy & Transport in figures (2001), IRTAD

Table 3.1b Road transport: Maximum gross vehicle weight (2001) S GB Fin D F Nl B Dk A Irl E P General (tonnes)

60 40 60 40 40 50 44 48 40 40 40 40

Combined (tonnes)

60 44 60 44 44 50 44 48 44 44 44 44

Casualties/billion veh kms

302 584 191 774 271 370 799 163 825 473 478 834

Source: E.U. Energy & Transport in figures (2001), IRTAD

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 31


3.3 Road safety in European countries: Development

Although some additional insight emerges from the distinction between fatal and non-fatal injuries, it is decided, mainly because of the quality and availability of the data, to drop this distinction. From this point on only the total number of casualties will be discussed. For the same reason the distinction between professional transport and all sort of traffic will be dropped. As figure 3.5 depicts, between 1990 and 1999 the number of casualties (fatalities plus injured but not solely fatalities) has fallen with relatively high numbers in almost all countries. Figure 3.6 shows the reduction of casualties in more detail by comparing the level of 1990 with the level of 1999. Listed ascending on base of percentage of reduction, two groups emerge; one group with comparatively high reduction percentages (20% or more) and a group with low reduction percentages (less than 15% reduction). Of all countries identified, only Sweden shows a slight increase in number of people injured, of course this is partly due to the already very low casualty rates of this country. Leading in reduction are Portugal, Poland and France. The first two had relatively high casualty rates in 1990 and reached major reduction; France was already on a medium casualty level in 1990 and still improved this level substantially towards 1999. Development year 2000 on year 1999 Collective figures for the countries mentioned in figure 3.5, showed an further decrease in the number of people killed in road accidents of about 2 percent. Figure 3.5 Development casualties per billion vehicle kilometres 1990 – 1999 (sorted ascending on base of “casualties 1999”; per billion vehicle km)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Denmark

Finlan

d

France

Sweden

The N

etherl

ands

Irelan

dSpa

in

United

King

dom

Poland

German

y

Belgium

Portug

al

casualties 1990casualties 1999

Source IRTAD, edited NEA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 32


Figure 3.6 Development casualties per billion vehicle kilometres 1990 – 1999 Mutation (sorted ascending on base of “percent reduction”)

-2,7

8,8 10,112,8

22,8

32,8 33,9 35,8 36,8 37,240,7

45,0

-5,0

5,0

15,0

25,0

35,0

45,0

55,0

Sweden

German

y

United

King

dom

The N

etherl

ands

Irelan

d

Belgium

Finlan

dSpa

in

Denmark

France

Poland

Portug

al

Source IRTAD, edited NEA

3.4 Countries in focus

This paragraph focuses on road safety in three countries: The Netherlands, France and Poland. Besides more general road safety data, also data about road safety conditions will be described. Two main conditions can be identified:

• Safety on the roads, for example the quality of vehicles and road types • Safety regarding participation on the roads, which involves the safety culture in

organisations and influential measures such as driver training Remark:

Mainly caused by the (un) availability of basic data, in the following sections a mix of figures based on either “professional transport” or “trucks” are distinguished. Although in some countries6 there is a strong positive relation between “professional transport” and “(the ownership of) trucks”, in fact this mix may cause confusion.

3.5 Road safety: The Netherlands

General statistics As presented in figure 3.7, the number of casualties in the Netherlands per billion vehicle kilometres is much higher for professional transport than for general traffic in total.

66 FFoorr eexxaammppllee,, iinn tthhee NNeetthheerrllaannddss pprrooffeessssiioonnaall ((hhaauulliieerr)) ccoommppaanniieess oowwnn ((aanndd ddrriivvee)) tthhee mmaajjoorriittyy ooff tthhee

ttrruucckkss..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 33


Development year 2000 on year 1999 In 1999 the total number of fatalities reached a level of 8,0 per billion vehicle kilometres. In the year 2000 this figure equals 8.9 fatalities7) per billion vehicle kilometres, which means an increase by more than 10%. For the year 2001 this figure will drop to the level of 1999. Figure 3.7 Casualties per billion vehicle kilometre

446389

800702

0100200300400500600700800900

1990 1999

number of casualties

Traffic in total

Professionaltransport


Although the number of total number of road traffic casualties has been declining for years and still is declining, from 1998 onward the number of fatalities has started to rise again. Not only the number of deaths is rising, also the number of fatal accidents with involvement of trucks increases (see also figure 3.8). The reason behind this rise is not clear yet. Figure 3.8 Total road fatalities and the number of fatal accidents with trucks

Involved. 1995

0

200 400

600

800

1000

1200 1400

1600

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000Year

Deaths Trucks Involved i l d

Source: CBS, TLN

77 SSoouurrccee:: IIRRTTAADD

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 34


Safety on roads Infrastructure In 1997 one third of all accidents on motorways involved accidents with trucks and (commercial) vans. Of this total 16% is caused by heavy trucks and 16% light commercial vehicles8 (GVW up to 4,5 tonnes) such as vans. Both truck types together contributed to 25% of all fatal accidents on motorways. Almost 30% of the deaths on the secondary roads are due to a collision with a truck or commercial van. Accidents with trucks and vans are often quite severe. This fact shows also from the presented figures. Trucks and commercial vans have a relatively low share in the total road traffic (about 18%; see table 3.2), but they have, as described above, a large share in the traffic deaths (about 25%). Table 3.2 Shares of vehicle types based on vehicle counting during working days

Passenger cars (%)

Truck (%) Commercial Vans(%)

Busses (%) Motors (%)

1997 80.6 15.0 3.1 0.8 0.5 2001 81.2 14.8 3.0 0.6 0.4

Source: AVV. Safety of participation Quality of drivers In 1997 the main accident cause on motorways was steering faults by truck- or van-driver. This implies that a reduction of the traffic accidents can be achieved by re-educating drivers. Stimulating safer driving is an important item in the Netherlands. Diverse organisations have put a lot of effort into different studies regarding road safety and behaviour. A road transport organisation, Transport en Logistiek Nederland (TLN), started a pilot project in 1998/1999 regarding active damage and accident prevention in companies. The active damage and accident prevention programme is a dynamical programme. This requires a transport organisation to analyse the damage developments and to determine the reasons as to why the damages or accidents occurred. The organisation then implements measures that will reduce the reoccurrence of the same accidents and damages. TLN has estimated what the savings, in terms of reducing of fatalities, are.

88 SSoouurrccee:: BBeelleeiiddssppllaann vveerrkkeeeerrssvveeiilliigghheeiidd ggooeeddeerreennvveerrvvooeerr oovveerr ddee wweegg 22000011--22000066

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 35


Table 3.3 Cost effectiveness of dynamical damage and accident prevention in organisations

Savings in terms of deaths 7.8 Term (in years) 1 Average savings of deaths per year 7.8 Costs (€) 11

Source: TLN TLN has also investigated the (theoretical) effectiveness of other, road sector specific measures. The table describes the top-twenty9 of behavioural and vehicle oriented measures. Table 3.4 Vehicle and behaviour related measures sorted on base of cost effectiveness

Measure Savings of deaths Costs (€) Blind spot mirror new distribution vehicles 4.2 3

Blind spot mirror all distribution trucks (incl. existing)

4.6 5

Blind spot mirror all new trucks 4.5 14 Open side guard panels new trucks 3.2 12

Promotion seatbelt-use 0.5 0.2 Black Box New trucks 9.5 61

Blind spot mirror all trucks 5.0 24 Open side guard panels distribution trucks 3.6 14

Ecocombi (extra long trucks) 0.5 5 Sleep alert systems 4.5 61

Damage prevention in companies 7.5 11 Public promotion campaign: understanding

road transport 3.0 5

Closed side guards instead open side guards new distribution vehicles

1.3 23

Closed side guards for new distribution vehicles without open side guards

5.0 46

Retro reflective markings on side of all new vehicles

1.6 31

Source: SWOV, TLN

99 BBaasseedd oonn tthhee ccoosstt eeffffeeccttiivveenneessss ((ccoosstt ooff mmeeaassuurree // ((SSiizzee ooff pprroobblleemm**uuttiilliissaattiioonn**eeffffeeccttiivveenneessss))

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 36


Law enforcement As stated in chapter two, the government can force companies to increase their safety culture through law enforcement. Table 3.5 shows the development of violations and the number of trucks that were pulled over during traffic surveillance. Although the number of trucks that were pulled over has declined during the last five years, the number of violations per stop increased. This mean that the authorities managed to pin point the more serious acts of traffic violation. Comparing 1996 with 2000 the number of violations per stopped truck is more than doubled. This “success” may be interesting to be studied in more detail. The number of violations stays about the same in the period monitored. However, conclusions on this fact can’t be drawn because the effect of governmental policy on the number of trucks to be pulled over is not entirely clear. Other influencing factors are the actual number of stopped vehicles, the (driving) behaviour of the driver and other road users, the behaviour (safety culture) of the transport company, the crowdedness of the traffic, etc. Table 3.5a Development of violations of road transport 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Stopped Number of stops 56.239 51.455 46.537 38.669 21.149 Violations 12.523 18.616 14.390 12.775 10.802 Violations/stop 0,22 0,36 0,31 0,33 0,51 Charges / Tickets per type of violation1) Driving hours regulation 4.576 2.393 2.070 1.532 1.163 Goods transport regulations

1.442 1.043 924 343 363

ADR 2.761 384 347 793 591 General traffic regulation

2.804 116 99 1.694 2.855

1) The reason for the strong decreases when comparing years is not quite clear (yet). Part is for certain caused by the adaptation of the monitoring system and of the road traffic legislation.

Source: RVI, TLN

Table 3.5b Development of violations of road transport Percentages (1996=100) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Stopped Number 100 91 83 69 38 Violations 100 149 115 102 86 Violations/stops 100 163 139 148 229

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 37


3.6 Road safety: Poland

General statistics One result of Poland’s changing economy has been a rapid growth of motorisation. Over the last decade (1990 – 2000) the number of vehicles increased by 36 % with passenger cars up by 47 %. Miles travelled have increased significantly as well. The rapid and unconstrained growth of motorization came as quite a surprise. With the infrastructure not being able to meet the growing needs, no effective methods of road traffic law enforcement, differentiated fleets, no consistent programs to combat the negative effects of growing motorization and disregard for the experience of Western countries, Poland found itself hard hit with the consequences. Over the last decade (1990-2000) as many as 76,000 people died on Polish roads, with more than 750,000 injured. Recent years have seen a change for the better though. In 2001 there were 53,799 accidents in Poland with 5,534 fatalities and 68,194 injured. 2001 was the fourth consecutive year showing a drop in fatalities (by 12% compared to 2000). There were fewer accidents (by 6%) and injured (by 5%). Despite these positive developments, the risk on Polish roads continues to be high. Figure 3.9 and 3.10 depicts the development of road safety in Poland. Speeding is a common offence in Poland. It is estimated that on some road types more than 80% of drivers exceed the speed limit. In 1998, speeding caused every fifth accident. In rural areas 50% and on roads passing through small towns 65% 10. Development: year 2002 and 2001 on base of the year 200011 As shown in figure 3.9 the total number of road traffic casualties reached a level of 691 per billion vehicle kilometres. This figure is estimated to drop with more than 16 percent to a (estimated) level of 595 per billion vehicle kilometres. For the year 2002 a further decrease with another 10 percent is expected.

1100 SSoouurrccee:: NNaattiioonnaall pprrooggrraammmmee ooff rrooaadd ssaaffeettyy iinn PPoollaanndd 1111 SSoouurrccee:: PPoolliiccee HHeeaaddqquuaarrtteerrss PPoollaanndd;; eeddiitteedd NNEEAA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 38


Figure 3.9 Road traffic casualties per billion vehicle kilometres Figure 3.10 Total road deaths and the number of deadly accidents with trucks involved Source: Police headquarters Poland, edited NEA

01995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Overall, road transport drivers were involved in 18-19 % of total accidents in Poland, Y

Source: Police H

1075

844

691780

696

544

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1991 1995 2000

year

road traffic in totalprofessional road transport

10002000

3000

4000

50006000

7000

8000

DeathsTrucks involved

number of deaths

ear

Source: Police Headquarters Poland; edited NEA

eadquarters Poland; edited NEA

Overall, professional drivers were involved in 18-19% of the total accidents in Poland, more than the percentage of commercial vehicles as part of Poland’s total registered vehicles (which is 14 %). Professional drivers caused less than half (45 %) of accidents that they were involved in. Figure 3.11 provides more insight in the (development of the) number of casualties in which professional road transport is involved.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 39


Figure 3.11 Comparison between professional road transport and non-professional traffic; casualties per billion kilometres

1119

865

711780

696

544

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1991 1995 2000

non professional trafficprofessional road transport

Safety on roads Infrastructure Poland has 377,625 km of public roads, which consists of 18,116 km national roads12, 28,344 km provincial (secondary; “voivodship”) roads and 127,660 km of municipality (“gmina”) roads (based on the year 2001)13. It is suggested that the poor technical state of the roads is a significant cause of the high number of fatal accidents, but from official policy data it shows that only up to 0.1% of all fatal accidents occurred on roads in poor technical condition. Even if we agree that there might be some underreporting in this case, the technical condition of the roads cannot be the major cause for Poland’s high accident rate. Poland also has very few motorways which also influences road safety, because in general motorways are the safest road types. In 2001 Poland had 358 km)14, of motorways but it is difficult to establish whether this has an important effect on road safety. So far it is these few motorways that have had the highest accident rates. Per 100 km of motorways in Poland there are 16 killed and 15 people die on expressways (second in the ranking). This is sufficient proof of the fact that good roads do not take care of the problem; people have to know how to use them.

1122 IInn 11999999 aa mmaajjoorr aaddmmiinniissttrraattiivvee rreeffoorrmm ttooookk ppllaaccee oonn tthhee ccllaassssiiffiiccaattiioonn ooff tthhee rrooaadd ccaatteeggoorriieess.. FFiigguurreess

bbaasseedd oonn tthheessee ccaatteeggoorriieess ffrroomm bbeeffoorree aanndd aafftteerr tthhee rreeffoorrmmaattiioonn ccaannnnoott bbee ccoommppaarreedd wwiitthhoouutt pprroobblleemmss.. 1133 SSoouurrccee:: WWaarrssaaww vvooiiccee;; CCeennttrraall SSttaattiissttiiccaall OOffffiiccee,, rreeppoorrtt:: ““TTrraannssppoorrtt--ooppeerraattiinngg rreessuullttss””.. 1144 SSoouurrccee:: WWoorrlldd hhiigghhwwaayyss..ccoomm

Source: Police Headquarters Poland; edited NEA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 40


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 41

Safety of participation Quality of drivers and organisations Transport operators take no interest in road safety. To a large extent, the economy is the reason why. Estimates show that as many as 100,000 different businesses hold transport licences. Of this number about 60-70,000 actually render transport services, including some 11,000 in international transport. 90 % of Poland’s transport businesses are self-employed people with one or two vehicles, usually in poor condition. Poland only has some 38 companies that operate 50-100 vehicles and 10 that own more than 100 vehicles. Apart from licensed transport companies, there is an unknown number of illegal operators who do not hold the required licenses. All this means that the existing transport businesses outnumber the actual needs. The result, in particular during the present economic downturn and reduced demand for transport, is fierce competition and cost cutting measures, which include road safety expenditure cuts and violation of drivers’ hours.

3.7 Road safety: France

General statistics Just like Poland and the Netherlands, the number of casualties per billion vehicle kilometres is substantially higher for professional transport than for traffic in total (see figure 3.12). When comparing 1999 with 1990 the reduction in casualties (fatalities plus injured but not solely fatalities), however, was in professional transport much higher than for the total.

457

286

684

364

0

100200

300

400

500600

700

800

1990 1999

Traffic in total

Professionaltransport


Source: IRTAD; edited NEA

Figure 3.12 Casualties (killed plus injured but not killed) per billion vehicle kilometre Trucks are not often involved in accidents; only 3,8%. The accidents that occur are severe. Approximately 13% of the accidents result in deaths, about 1,8% of the deaths are occupants of a truck. Figure 3.13 and 3.14 provides more details.


Figure 3.13a Total road fatalities and the number of deadly accidents with trucks involved

0

1 0 0 0

2 0 0 0

3 0 0 0

4 0 0 0

5 0 0 0

6 0 0 0

7 0 0 0

8 0 0 0

9 0 0 0

D e a th s

T ru c k s in v o lv e d

number of deaths 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 7 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1

Y e a rSource: ONISR; edited NEA

Development: year 2002 and 2001 on base of the year 199015 As shown in figure 3.13b the total number of road traffic casualties is still slowly decreasing after a steep decent when comparing 1990 with 1995. As in figure 3.13b the actual numbers are shown, thus not divided by the number of vehicle kilometres, the real reduction is in fact a little lower. For example: 1999 compared with 1990 shows a relative decrease of nearly 60 percent (figure 3.12) and the actual decrease is nearly 25% (figure 3.13b).

1155 SSoouurrccee:: OONNIISSRR;; eeddiitteedd NNEEAA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 42


Figure 3.13b Long-term development of road casualties Actual number of casualties and fatalities (Indices 1990=100)

100.0

81.678.6 77.7

81.6

77.7

73.8 74.8

100.0

80.3

75.3 75.1 74.6 74.271.8

68.1

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

fatalitiescasualties

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 43


Figure 3.14 Injuries in total and injuries in accidents with truck involvement Source: ONISR, edited NEA

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Year

Severe injuries

Trucks involved


Source: ONISR; edited NEA Safety on roads Infrastructure The motorways, called “Autoroutes” in France, are the safest roads in France. The chance of being involved in a deadly accident is four times lower on a motorway then on a state highway (Route Nationale), despite the relatively high traffic intensity of motorways. Table 3.6 clarifies the relation between road types, traffic intensity, accident chance and deaths. Table 3.6 Division of road types, traffic and accidents

Length (%) Traffic (%) Accidents (%) Deaths (%) Motorways 1.0 20.3 6.0 6.0

State Highway (Route nationale)

2.6 17.3 14.6 24.5

Secondary roads (Route

Departmentale) 36.4 36.3 31.3 53.6

Other 60.0 26.1 48.1 16.0

Source ONISR, edited NEA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 44


Safety of participation Quality of drivers The results of a public opinion poll in France held in November 2001 and involving 1009 people shows that the majority (87%) is interested in road safety problems. Figure 3.15 Answers on the question: “One of the risk factors is the Human Behaviour,

which according to you is the most important, and which is second most important?”

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Drinking and driving

Speeding

Disrespect of traffic regulations

Usage of telephone during driving

Tiredness

Use of medicines

Source: Ministère de l'Equipement, des Transports et du Logement, edited NEA.

Quality of vehicles As stated in the first part of this paragraph, 998 persons were killed in a truck related accident. The next table shows that one quarter of all accidents occur during the night. Most accidents in which trucks are involved occur during the day. Lets examine accidents during the night on intersections. Table 3.7 Accidents with involvement of trucks Location Accident Fatal accidents Deaths Day Besides intersections 3 445 (55%) 447 (52%) 513 (51%) On intersections 1 145 (18%) 138 (16%) 155 (16%) Total 4 590 (73%) 585 (68%) 668 (67%) Night Besides intersections 1 386 (22%) 239 (28%) 286 (29%) On intersections 315 (5%) 38 (4%) 44 (4%) Total 1 701 (27%) 277 (32%) 330 (33%)

Source: ONISR, edited NEA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 45


Table 3.8 Accidents with truck involvement during the night on an intersection Accidents Deaths

Vehicle – Vehicle Frontal-impact 19 6% 5 11% Rear side-impact 27 9% 2 5% Side-impact 183 58% 24 55%

Vehicles – vehicles Multiple collision 33 10% 6 13%

Other collisiontype 38 12% 6 14% No collision 15 5% 1 2% Total 315 100% 44 100%

Source: ONISR, edited NEA More than half of all the people killed at night, dies in a side-impact crash with a truck. Reductions of that type of accidents are possible with the use of reflective side-markings on the side of a truck.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 46


4 ROAD SAFETY POLICY- PROFESSIONAL DRIVER TRAINING

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 Definitions

Although it is not the objective of this pilot project on benchmarking of road safety, some highlights of the EU legislation on road safety in general and driver training in particular, have to be presented. The highlights of road safety related legislation will be presented in the next paragraph. Next some key definitions have to be clarified. First of all we have to define ‘driver’ and then the concept of ‘training’. Since the definitions that are used in the CARE database are public, we will use these definitions. The CARE database defines driver as: person driving or riding any motorised vehicle or pedal cycle. The CARE database distinguishes between the following categories: • bus: motor vehicle with at least 4 wheels, used for transporting people; seating for more

than 8 passengers. Most of the countries also have a distinction between buses for more than 8 passengers and buses for more than 16 passengers;

• heavy goods vehicles: motor vehicles with at least four wheels, with a permitted gross weight of over 3.5 tonne, used only for the transport of goods; with or without a trailer; including lorry, road tractor, road tractor with semi-trailer, lorry with trailer, tanker (Except Finland);

• lorry less than 3.5 tonnes: motor vehicle with a permitted gross vehicle weight of less than 3.5 tonnes, used only for the transport of goods.

Following these definitions, a choice should be made: • only trucks over 3.5 tonnes; • trucks over 3.5 tonnes and buses for more than 8 passengers; • only trucks; also mini-trucks, less than 3.5 tonnes; • all trucks, over and less than 3.5 tonnes, and buses for more than 8 passengers. The project team takes into account only trucks over 3.5 tonnes, since a lot of EU and national regulations, also with regard to driver training, are focussed on these kind of trucks. Concerning buses: all buses for more than 8 passengers are included. This will enlarge the target group. Another reason is that the safety of buses is even more important since many lives are often at stake.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 47


4.1.2 Highlights on EU legislation on driver training

Up until quite recently EU legislation with regard to training of (professional) drivers has been limited. On this moment the main legislation origins form Council Directive 76/91416 and Council Regulation 3820/8517. The first legislation only applies to drivers younger than 21 driving lorries over 7.5 tonnes maximum weight. The key text of this Directive is as follows: Table 4.1 Highlights Directive 76/914

COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 16 December 1976 on the minimum level of training (76/914/EEC) The driver of a vehicle intended for the transport of goods having an authorised maximum weight of over 7.5 metric tons and to which this Regulation applies, if he has not reached the age of 21 years, must hold a certificate of professional competence recognised by one of the Member States confirming that he has completed a training course for drivers of vehicles intended for the carriage of goods by road.

Since EU Directives only define a minimum level, Member States can have additional regulations with regard to training of professional drivers. Until now only The Netherlands and France have an obligatory certificate for all professional drivers. The key issues for this pilot project of Council Regulation No 3820/85 are: Table 4.2 Highlights Council Regulation No 3820/85

COUNCIL REGULATION of 20 December 1985 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport (No 3820/85) The objective of the regulation is: “To specify the working conditions applicable to drivers, particularly as regards to driving time and rest periods, and to ensure that these are observed through the use of recording equipment.” The (summarised) content is: 1) “The relevant provisions are brought together in a single text, in consequence whereof

Regulation (EEC) NO 543/69 is repealed. 2) The Regulation applies to carriage by road (any journey, on roads open to the public, of

a laden or unladen vehicle used for the carriage of passengers or goods). Excluded from this definition are two categories of vehicle: small vehicles (less than 3.5 tonnes, maximum carrying capacity 9 persons) and vehicles used for special purposes (breakdowns, armed forces, medical care, etc.).

1166 CCoouunncciill DDiirreeccttiivvee 7766//991144//EEEECC ooff 1166 DDeecceemmbbeerr 11997766 oonn tthhee mmiinniimmuumm lleevveell ooff ttrraaiinniinngg ffoorr ssoommee rrooaadd

ttrraannssppoorrtt ddrriivveerrss.. 1177 CCoouunncciill RReegguullaattiioonn ((EEEECC)) NNoo 33882200//8855 ooff 2200 DDeecceemmbbeerr 11998855 oonn tthhee hhaarrmmoonniizzaattiioonn ooff cceerrttaaiinn ssoocciiaall

lleeggiissllaattiioonn rreellaattiinngg ttoo rrooaadd ttrraannssppoorrtt.. TThhee ffuullll tteexxtt iiss iinnccoorrppoorraatteedd iinn AAnnnneexx 11..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 48


3) For the carriage of goods, the minimum ages for drivers are 18 years (for vehicles under 7.5 tonnes and provided the drivers holds a certificate of competence) and 21 years in other cases. For the carriage of passengers, the minimum ages is 21 years and drivers must also fulfil certain other conditions in terms of job experience.

4) The daily driving periods (maximum 9 hours) and the weekly driving periods (maximum 6 days) must be broken up by rest periods. Drivers must have a rest period of at least 11 consecutive hours in each period of 24 hours in each period of 24 hours (or 9 consecutive hours not more than three times per week) and 45 consecutive hours in the course of each week (with exceptions). After 4½ hours’ driving, drivers must have a break of 45 minutes (or several breaks of 15 minutes).

5) Member States may grant exemptions in certain cases (national transport) of for certain vehicles (those carrying live animals, those used for agricultural purposes, those used for driving instruction, etc.).

6) In the case of regular passenger services, undertakings must follow a procedure which allows compliance with the above mentioned rules to be monitored. The procedure consists…….

7) The Commission is required to produce a report every years on the implementation of the social Regulations relating to road transport.” (An example of such a report can be found under COM(2000) 84 final: 19th Report from the Commission on the implementation in 1995-96 of Regulation (EEC) 3820/85 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport).

Starting 1.10.2003 Council Directive 2000/5618 will become applicable. This Directive lays down a lot of additional requirements for the practical and theoretical training of professional drivers. It can be concluded that practically this Directive combines driver licensing as well as certification with regard to professional competence. The key text of Directive 2000/56 can be seen in table 4.3.

1188 CCoommmmiissssiioonn DDiirreeccttiivvee 22000000//5566//EECC ooff 1144 SSeepptteemmbbeerr 22000000 aammeennddiinngg CCoouunncciill DDiirreeccttiivvee 9911//443399//EEEECC oonn

ddrriivviinngg lliicceennsseess..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 49


Table 4. Highlights Directive 2000/56

4. Specific provisions concerning categories C, C+E, C1, C1+E, D, D+E, D1 and D1+E 4.1. Compulsory check of general knowledge on: 4.1.1. Rules on driving hours and rest periods as defined by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85(1); use of the recording equipment as defined by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85(2)19, 4.1.2. Rules concerning the type of transport concerned: goods or passengers; 4.1.3. Vehicle and transport documents required for the national and international carriage of goods and passengers; 4.1.4. How to behave in the event of an accident; knowledge of measures to be taken after an accident or similar occurrence, including emergency action such as evacuation of passengers and basic knowledge of first aid; 4.1.5. The precautions to be taken during the removal and replacement of wheels; 4.1.6. Rules on vehicle weights and dimensions; rules on speed limiters; 4.1.7. Obstruction of the field of view caused by the characteristics of their vehicles; 4.1.8. Reading a road map, route planning, including the use of electronic navigation systems (optional); 4.1.9. Safety factors relating to vehicle loading: controlling the load (stowing and fastening), difficulties with different kinds of load (e.g. liquids, hanging loads, ...), loading and unloading goods and the use of loading equipment (categories C, C+E, C1, C1+E only); 4.1.10. The driver's responsibility in respect to the carriage of passengers; comfort and safety of passengers; transport of children; necessary checks before driving away; all sorts of buses should be part of the theory test (public service buses and coaches, buses with special dimensions, ...) (categories D, D+E, D1, D1+E only). 4.2. Compulsory check of general knowledge on the following additional provisions concerning categories C, C+E, D and D+E: 4.2.1. The principles of the construction and functioning of: internal combustion engines, fluids (e.g. engine oil, coolant, washer fluid), the fuel system, the electrical system, the ignition system, the transmission system (clutch, gearbox, etc.); 4.2.2. Lubrication and antifreeze protection; 4.2.3. The principles of the construction, the fitting, correct use and care of tyres; 4.2.4. The principles of the types, operation, main parts, connection, use and day-to-day maintenance of brake fittings and speed governors, and use of anti-lock brakes; 4.2.5. The principles of the types, operation, main parts, connection, use and day-to-day maintenance of coupling systems (categories C+E, D+E only); 4.2.6. Methods of locating causes of breakdowns; 4.2.7. Preventive maintenance of vehicles and necessary running repairs;

1199 CCoouunncciill RReegguullaattiioonn ((EEEECC)) NNoo 33882211//8855 ooff 2200 DDeecceemmbbeerr 11998855 oonn rreeccoorrddiinngg eeqquuiippmmeenntt iinn rrooaadd ttrraannssppoorrtt..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 50


4.2.8. The driver's responsibility in respect of the receipt, carriage and delivery of goods in accordance with the agreed conditions (categories C, C+E only).

The Commission is currently developing a new Directive. Although final adoption is not reached yet, the developments in this draft Directive are interesting. The Commission plans to lay down a minimum number of training hours for each license category, as well as minimum number of training once in the five years for all professional drivers. Up until now such an obligatory periodical training is only applicable in the Czech Republic and France. On 5 December 2002 the Council adopted a common position on a Proposal for a new Directive20 (see also Annex 1) on the training of professional drivers for the carriage of goods or passengers by road. Taken from the explanatory memorandum of this Proposal are the following highlights: Table 4.4 Highlights Proposal for a Directive (COM(2001)56 final)

Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 2 February 2001 on the training of professional drivers of goods or passengers by road (COM(2001) 56 final) In the Proposal it is concluded that the vast majority of the professional driver solely on the basis of their (once obtained) driving license. It is also concluded that the demands on professional drivers in today’s traffic, call for solid basic and continuous training. “Such training will help to improve road safety, safety during stops as well as the standard of service, and will help people taking up the occupation and boost employment. For both young people interested in becoming professional drivers and drivers already who are already working, the introduction of harmonised compulsory training for all will underline the fact that the opening up of the transport market and growth in competition go hand in hand with the harmonisation of social matters and conditions of employment. At the same time, the training must be practical and must help to recruit new professional drivers. This Directive therefore develops a Community framework which encompasses the existing vocational training under Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 and provides answers to the specific problems in the field of recruitment, quality and competition.”

4.1.3 Summary of EU legislation with relevance to road safety

1) Driving times and rest periods (see also point 3) With regard to driving times and rest periods the following EU legislation is important: • Council Regulation No 3820/85 of 20 December on the harmonisation of certain social

legislation relating to road transport. • Council Regulation No 3821/85 on 20 December 1985 on recording equipment in road

transport

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 51


• Council Directive 88/599 on standard checking procedures for the implementation of Regulation No. 3820/85

2) Tachograph requirements EC Regulation 3821/85 lays down the requirements for the use of tachographs. The main provisions of this Regulation are as follows: • Tachographs must be used in all vehicles covered by EU rules • A tachograph record has to be kept by any driver of a vehicle covered by the regulation • Tachographs must be conform detailed specifications as provided for in the regulations • Tachographs have to be calibrated and sealed before the vehicle goes into service and any

repair will be done at an approved centre • Initial fitting, calibration and seals may be carried out by vehicle manufactures • The authority needs to approve workshops were tachographs are installed • Tachographs are always tested during periodical checks. The amendment of the 'tachograph regulation’ (Council Regulation 2135/98/EC) concerns the gradual implementation of digital recording devices. Especially Directive 88/599 is one of the few examples of EU rules that include direct obligations for Member States concerning control and enforcement in the field of driving times and rest regimes. The obligations are: • Each year at least 1% of drivers' working days shall be checked; of these checks at least

15% is to be carried out at the roadside and at least 25% at the premises of undertakings • Minimum elements of roadside checks: daily driving and rest periods, breaks and recording

equipment • Minimum elements of check at the premises of undertakings: weekly and two weekly

periods and record sheets 3) Legislation in the field of drivers’ hours The legislation in the field for drivers’ hours is famous for its complexity and the difficulties with regard to proper control and enforcement. One of the problems is the difference between maximum driving times (regulated by EEC Regulation 3820/85) and working times, and their applicability to self-employed drivers. Especially with regard to working times of mobile workers a large debate is still going on. Working time in general is regulated by Council Directive 93/104/EC. However, the transport sector is excluded from this Directive. During last years the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament tried to agree on a specific working time Directive for mobile workers in road transport. Only in March 2001 a Common Position was adopted.

2200 SSeeee AAnnnneexx 11 ffoorr aa ffuullll lliissttiinngg ooff tthhee ccoonntteenntt..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 52


Common Position 20/2001 contains specific rules for the working time of mobile workers employed by transport companies. The main discussion topic was the applicability of the draft Directive to self-employed drivers. In the Common Position this group of drivers is excluded for the time being. First the Commission will assess the economic, social and safety effects of the temporary exclusion of self-employed drivers. Depending on the results of this assessment, self-employed drivers will be included or not. The Commission will submit proposals with regard to self-employed drivers no later than five years after entry into force of this Directive. The Common Position lies down that the Working time Directive for mobile workers in road transport will contain the following provisions. • The maximum average weekly working time may not exceed 48 hours. • This might be extended to 60 hours only if over four months the average of 48 hours is not

exceeded. • Mobile workers may under no circumstances work for more than six consecutive hours

without a break. • If night work is performed, the daily working time does not exceed 10 hours in each 24-

hour period. • Employers shall be responsible for recording the working time of mobile drivers. At the end of the year 2001 a “Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council” on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport” was proposed (COM(2001) 573 final, 12 October 2001; for a listing the full text see Annex 1). The objective of this Proposal is:

“The proposal aims to clarify and simplify the current legislation making it easier to comprehend and enforce. The scope has been clearly defined, firstly, by setting out more comprehensively when AETR or the Regulation should apply; and secondly, by setting out the category of goods and passenger vehicles affected – goods vehicles over 3.5 tonnes; and passenger vehicles suitable for carrying over 9 persons – based on the two current major exemptions. The proposal also seeks to update the other current exemptions and derogations to reflect changes in the road transport sector and, in so doing, to broaden the scope of application of the Regulation within the road transport sector in the Union.”

4) Driver examination Council Directive 91/439/ EC of July 29 1991 on driving licenses has the following features

• Road safety • Facilitating the recognition of driving licences and the movement of persons settling in

another Member State without passing a new driving test • Harmonisation of categories of vehicles • Defining minimum requirements for obtaining the licence • Specific provisions for handicapped people

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 53


Main features:

• All national driving licences shall be mutually recognised • All driving licences newly issued should be in conformity with community models • Describes detailed vehicle categories and sub-categories, determines conditions of

issuing licences according to these categories • Allows restriction in the case of physical disability and sets minimum age conditions • Makes tests of skills and theoretical test as well as medical tests obligatory for

professional drivers Expected future changes: Progressive introduction of Commission Directive 2000/56 amending Council Directive 91/439/EC => Harmonised codes driver, vehicle adaptations and administrative matters specified => Further specification of minimum requirements for driving tests (aiming to contribute to road safety) 5) Drivers Training Whereas in the field of vehicle control and drivers examination the EU specifies minimum standards it is less present in the field of drivers training. Only Council Directive 76/914/EC on the minimum level of training for some road transport drivers includes some basic requirements for training of road haulage drivers (vehicles over 7.5 tonnes) and bus drivers (radius beyond 50 km). For the sector already covered – professional transport – the EU is planning to tighten the minimum framework as can be read from the Proposal for a Directive on training of professional drivers for the carriage of goods and passengers by road (COM 2001, 56 final – 2001/0033). Key requirement is included in article 4 of the draft: “exercise of the occupation of professional driver for the carriage of goods or passengers by road shall be subject to successful completion of the basic training and the continuous training as provided for in this directive”. The content of the basic training is specified throughout the directive and its annexes. 2 important features:

• 210-630 hours of compulsory education for drivers (depending on starting situation) • 5 days re-education after 5 years

However, the Commission is conscious that drivers training is one of the most effective ways for improving road safety, and that the content and the methods of training need to be modernised.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 54


4.1.4 Certificate of Professional Competence

A Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) is a diploma which, in a number of countries, is closely linked to the driving licence, especially the group 2 driving licence (C1, C1 +E, C, C+E, D1, D1+E, D, D+E). International legislation stipulates that a Certificate of Professional Competence is compulsory for the transport of passengers (if the driver has no experience); for carrying more than 7,500 kg if the driver is under 21 years of age; for the transport of dangerous goods, etc. In many cases, Member States impose stricter rules (for example by making the certificate obligatory for all professional drivers of group 2) or less strict rules (e.g. by only allowing the transport of goods over 7,500 kg from a minimum age of 21, thus avoiding the introduction of the Certificate of Professional Competence for the transport of goods). The detailed contents of the syllabus for current certificates of professional competence are not discussed but the links between a driving licence and the Certificate of Professional Competence are outlined for each country.

4.1.5 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence

Training The training is organised in several different ways throughout the various countries. In many countries training at a recognised driving school is compulsory. Some countries have also introduced other measures. In this introduction two of the most important regulations are described in more detail before the systems in the various countries are dealt with. Accompanied driving In this system, a non-professional supervisor is assigned, who attends to the first part of the training. After the candidate has completed the first part of the training at a driving school, a contract between the student, the driving school and the supervisor is drawn up. The student may only take part in traffic while being accompanied by the supervisor. During this period of accompanied driving the student has to return to the driving school regularly with his supervisor to attend further training. The advantage of this system is that the student gains driving experience during the training. This driving experience has proved to be very useful for the period immediately after the driving licence has been gained. Provisional Licence A provisional licensing system allows a learner-driver to practise in traffic prior to passing the driving test, under certain restrictions/conditions. Generally, this system also requires a supervisor. Provisional licensing exists in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Belgium, Finland and Sweden.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 55


The system of provisional licensing aims to give students the possibility of gaining more driving experience prior to receiving the driving licence and thus driving more safely after they have gained their driving licence. On average the minimum age for a provisional licence is fixed at e.g. 16 or 17, instead of 18, which is the minimum age for a permanent driving licence.

4.1.6 Measures after having obtained a driving licence

A number of CIECA members have introduced measures for the group of drivers who have only held a driving licence for a short time. Many measures exist. They will first be described in the introduction below. Next, if countries have these measures, they are described by country. Probational licence A novice driver receives a probational licence after having passed the driving test. It is only valid for a limited period of time. During this period the learner is closely monitored by the authorities. If a probational licence holder commits one or more (serious) traffic offences within this limited period, he can be forced to attend further training or he can lose his driving licence. After the probational period, the driving licence is automatically converted into a full driving licence. The purpose of probational licensing is to make novice drivers more conscious of their responsibilities in traffic, in order to improve their contribution to road safety. Restrictions In many countries, the novice driver is subject to certain restrictions during a certain period of time after having passed the driving test. Restrictions can be a prohibition from night driving or from transporting passengers, a lower alcohol level, a lower speed limit, etc. The purpose of these measures is to decrease the risk factors for novice drivers. Staged access With staged access we mean that the driver must gain experience in a certain category in the first period after he has passed the driving test, before he gains access to a "heavier" category. For instance, there is staged access for the categories C and D: a candidate needs a category B licence to gain access to categories C and D. However, Directive 91/439 of the European Union does not stipulate that applicants for these two categories should have a certain level of experience. Directive 91/439 only stipulates staged access for category A: two years of experience on a light motorcycle are required to gain access to heavier motorcycles. Access for this is obtained automatically. Ongoing training In some countries of the European Union, ongoing training must be followed during the first months or years after the driving test has been passed. The purpose of this is to be able to detect and correct the mistakes, which the novice driver has taught himself during his practical training. Such compulsory ongoing training exists in Luxembourg and Finland for instance.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 56


4.2 Country reports21

The policy of the participating countries, as well as some interesting countries which are not participating, is described in this chapter. Each country report contains some general information about their countries policy, information about the certificate of professional competence, information about conditions before obtaining a driving licence, information about measures after having obtained a driving licence and statistical information. Additional information, in the form of overviews, can be found in Annex 3.

4.2.1 Policy framework France

4.2.1.1 General information

Objectives of the general road safety policy

The policy for road safety being conducted in France is based on two major principles: • Road safety is a component of public safety in general and powerful thought and action

synergies must be sought towards this end. • Its policy must be more "citizen-focused", based on solid partnerships in which the

government must become involved, yet without exercising a monopoly in terms of initiatives and action.

The concrete basis for this policy is expressed, in particular, through the decisions made by the Inter-ministerial road safety committees, as well as by the Law of June 18, 1999, the first law specifically dedicated to road safety. The major strategic axes of the policy that has been implemented are as follows. 1. THE SET-UP OF CONSTANT EDUCATION PROGRAMS Road safety and automobile driving require constant instruction, from the youngest age at school, and then throughout a driver’s entire life. Involvement of the national education system will be expanded with the institution of an "initial road safety" certificate in primary school, to be added to the road safety school certificates (ASSR) issued at the junior high-school level to students aged 12 and 14. 2211 AAddddiittiioonnaall iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn iiss oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm tthhee rreeppoorrtt ””SSppiieekkeenn mmaagg,, mmaaaarr wwaatt iiss hheett bbeessttee aannttwwoooorrdd””;; NNEEAA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 57


1.1. The driver’s test should correspond to real learning of safety and driving. In 2002, the ASSR became the first step towards earning a driver’s license.

1.2. Supervision of the first years of driving is under study: it could include a series of educational measures (mandatory training for example) or regulatory measures.

1.3. In partnership with the insurance companies, evaluation courses for young drivers and advanced courses for experienced drivers, on a volunteer basis.

1.4. Labeling of the road safety and driving instruction activities using a certification process exclusively based on educational criteria is currently in progress.

2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SAFETY CULTURE IN BUSINESS. The development of highway risk prevention programs in companies (including a training portion, but which are leading to wider and more diversified actions) is a priority direction. Approximately 20% of road deaths are on-the-job accidents and half of the serious on-the-job accidents are automobile accidents.

Thought on modifying the labour code so as to recognize the traffic risk as a professional risk is in progress. Road Safety and the French national health insurance have already established a partnership to develop road accident prevention not only in road transportation companies, but in those concerned by the travel safety of their employees, as well. Moreover, a memo from the Prime Minister makes it mandatory to devise prevention programs in the State divisions.

3. APPLYING THE RULE Particularly complex, the system of controls and sanctions suffers from numerous insufficiencies. • The probability of being controlled is too low to make controls credible and dissuasive; • Equal treatment between citizens is not satisfactory, due in particular to procedures that

are either neglected or not conducted to term; • The system’s legibility is insufficient for enabling users to understand its mechanism and

accept its finalities; • The promptness of the system is impaired and there are excessive time lapses between the

offence and the application of the sanction, causing it to lose a large part of its educational virtues.

22000022 ((DDuuttcchh oonnllyy)).. IInn tthhiiss rreeppoorrtt aa ssuummmmaarryy ppeerr ccoouunnttrryy oonn tthhee rrooaadd ssaaffeettyy ppoolliiccyy iiss pprreesseenntteedd..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 58


Serious effort has been made to simplify the system since 1994 and improve its performance, particularly a flat-rate system for traffic tickets. Other essential measures have been taken recently. In particular: • The set-up of "departmental control programs" under the supervision of the prefects, with

three key objectives: increasing the intensity of the controls; better targeting of the real safety issues in terms of space and time; reducing the rate of non-sanctioned offences.

• A reinforcement plan for the resources available to security forces is currently being implemented, in priority within specialized units; a three-year equipment plan and an increase in staff.

• The automation of offence processing is the topic of a specific study. • An assessment of these various measures is underway. 4. MODIFICATION OF THE INSTITUTIONAL ORGANIZATION Two fundamental decisions have been made in this area:

4.1. Reinforcement of local organization: creation of a "State competencies centre" in each department and the set-up of 15 regional or inter-regional relay centres.

4.2. Creation of a National Road Safety Council, composed of 45 members representing all of the road safety players: public authorities, elected officials, civil society, and associations. Created for consultative purposes, it enjoys real autonomy of action and expression, as well as its own operating and research resources. Its aim is to drive proposals capable of presenting prioritised directions for action and to conduct any studies or evaluations it deems necessary.

5. "RE-EXAMINATION" OF THE INFRASTRUCTURES Accent must be put on the relationship between the infrastructure’s characteristics and the user’s behaviour; the central concept being the legibility of the road, in other words, the manner in which the user decodes and understands the infrastructure and its environment.

Two special actions should be highlighted:

• Safety control of road projects is currently being implemented throughout the State system;

• An evaluation study of how the French Departmental Public Works Divisions integrate road safety concerns into their practices has just been completed: significant conclusions result from it, in conceptual terms, as well as in technical and organizational terms and work modes.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 59


6. COMMUNICATION POLICY The policy for road safety communication to the general public has been significantly modified in recent years. It is characterized by strengthened resources, therefore strong media presence, and especially by the radical change in tone; it has changed from a convivial tone to a firmer one, closer to the accident and its consequences, which is similar to the case in many other countries.

In addition, it is essentially focused on educating in the rules of road safety in order to increase understanding among users and therefore social acceptability: "understand better the rule to respect it better".

Specific objectives safety in the road transportation industry A specific policy for fighting road hazards generated by the road transportation business has been set up. It is based, in particular, on:

• Labour legislation, the regulation of driving time and the use of the computerized tachograph.

• Specific training for truck drivers, in addition to that dispensed for obtaining the driver’s license, (minimum mandatory initial training and mandatory on-going safety training). Since 1995, 237,000 drivers have already been trained, as part of the on-going training program (FCOS) and 66,000 new drivers have obtained the “competency certificate” (FIMO).

• Within transportation companies, the development of road hazard prevention programs. Within this framework, the Road Safety Department has concluded tripartite conventions with the transport carrier federations and the French national health insurance department which, under certain conditions, may contribute to the financing of prevention program implementation.

• Finally, other measures have been recently decided upon: • The obligation to wear a seat belt in truck cabs, without waiting for the transposition of

the directive currently being negotiated in the European community. • The extension of the equipment of trucks with anti-embedment bars applicable starting in

early 2003. • The reinforcement of the regulation of tailing distances for all vehicles. • The reinforcement of speed control for trucks based on the tachograph recordings. • Seeking the improvement of parking capacities to enable truck drivers to comply with

labor legislation under proper comfort and safety conditions.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 60


4.2.1.2 Certificate of professional competence22

In France, the certificate of professional competence is embedded in the CAP, BEP, CFP and FIMO initial and FCOS continuous training. These are part of an ambitious policy plan, the ‘contrat du progrès’. Schematically23 the training system for professional drivers is as follows: Initial Training A) Candidates younger than 18 years CAP (Certificat d’Aptitude Professionnelle de conduite routière) and BEP (Brevet d’ Etudes Professionnelles) are diplomas organised by and issued at the ‘Lycées Technologiques’ by the Ministry of Education. The CAP and the BEP both lead directly to driving licences categories B, C and E, which can be obtained from the age of 18 years. The training starts at the age of 16 for the CAP and 15 years for the BEP. The training content of the CAP is the same as the content of the regular driving license. In the BEP training, issues like mathematics, French and English languages and transport company management techniques are addressed. B) Candidates older than 18 years The CFP (Certificat de Formation Professionnelle pour adultes) allows acquiring driving licenses categories C, C+E for candidates older than 18 years. D and D+E licences under the CFP can be obtained from the age of 21 years. These certificates are issued by the Ministry of Labour. The training consists of 630 hours or 18 weeks for the transport of goods (Categories C and C+E) and 420 hours of 12 weeks for the transport of passengers (categories D and D+E). C) The ‘regular’ system Any holder of a licence category C, C+E, D or D+E, who want to use this licence for professional purposes, has to follow the initial minimum training, the ‘Formation initiale minimale obligatoire’ (FIMO) The FIMO aims to professionalize the work of the professional driver and to improve road safety. The FIMO has a duration of 4 weeks and is meant for professional drivers for the transport of goods of more than 7.5 tonnes and the transport of passengers. Those candidates already holding a CAP (Certificat d’aptitude professionnelle de conduite routière) or a BEP (Brevet d’Etude Professionnelle) or a CFP (Certificat de Formation Professionnelle) of professional driver obtain a FIMO by equivalence. The ministry of transport, the Ministère de l’équipement, des transports et des logements has accredited some 136 centres of professional FIMO training, (driving schools, training centres like AFT and AFP) spread over the French territory. 2222 SSoouurrccee:: MMiinniissttèèrree ddee ll’’EEqquuiippeemmeenntt,, ddeess TTrraannssppoorrtt eett dduu LLooggeemmeenntt.. 2233 SSeeee aallssoo tthhee sscchheemmaattiicc oovveerrvviieeww iinn aannnneexx 33..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 61


Continuous training for professional drivers In France, continuous training for professional and non-professional drivers of vehicles heavier than 3,5 tonnes or 14m³ volume for the carriage of goods or passengers is regulated by the Formation Continue Obligatoire de Sécurité (FCOS). This training takes 3 days (24 hours in total) and has to be repeated every 5 years. The content of the FCOS training is a rehearsal of the technical knowledge the Highway Code, legislation, driving techniques, emergency behaviour and conduct towards the other road users. The FCOS training is organised by specialised organisations like AFT– IFTIM (46, Avenue des Villiers, 75387 Paris Cedex 17), AFPA (Département tertiaire, 63, Rue Ampère, Z.I. Les Chanoux, BP 155, 93331 Neuilly-sur-Marne), Promotrans (60,62 Rue d’Hauteville, 75010 Paris) and by accredited company training centres.

4.2.1.3 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence24

In France, a candidate has two possibilities to learn how to drive: 1. theory and practical training at a driving school 2. theory and practical training at a driving school, followed by a period of training with a

non-professional supervisor (only possible for category B). In system 1, no theory training is obligatory. A student has to follow at least 20 hours of practical training to be admitted to the practical test. System 2 consists of two periods: A) 20 hours of practical training at a driving school during which the candidate must successfully pass a

theory test. At the end of this training, he will get a certificate.

B) Training with a non-professional supervisor. This period must take at least 1 year, but with a maximum of 3 years from the date on the above-mentioned training certificate. During this period at least two meetings must take place between the student, the non-professional supervisor and the driving school, in order to check the candidate’s progress and to enhance his knowledge of road safety. The candidate must drive at least 3,000 km and have a special insurance.

Students driving with a non-professional supervisor are furthermore subject to the following speed limits:

• 110 km/h on motorways with a maximum speed limit of 130 km/h • 100 km/h on motorways with a maximum speed limit of 110 km/h • 80 km/h on secondary roads instead of 90 km/h

The non-professional supervisor must

• have a minimum age of 28

2244 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 62


• have held a category B driving licence for at least 3 years The training vehicle used in system 2 has to be equipped with two exterior mirrors. A plate with the letter(s) A or CA (Conduite Accompagnée) on the car indicates that it is being used for training with a non-professional supervisor. Both students in system 1 and students in system 2 need to be in the possession of a logbook to start their driving education. This logbook can be obtained from the age of 16, for any category. Candidates take an average of 5 hours theory training and approximately 20 hours of practical training. During the training the driving instructor, respectively the non-professional supervisor, has legal responsibility for the vehicle. The training in both systems can take place on the entire road network on French territory.

4.2.1.4 Measures after having obtained a driving licence25

There are restrictions during the first two years after getting a driving licence of any category. Driving licence holders, who have had their licence for less than two years, are not allowed to exceed the following speed limits:

• 80 km/hour on secondary roads (instead of 90 km/h); • 100 km/hour on motorways, and roads where the maximum speed limit is 110 km/hour; • 110 km/hour on motorways, where the maximum speed limit is 130 km/hour

Through a sign with the letter A the novice driver must indicate on the back of the car, that s/he is a novice driver. The period of two years can not be extended or shortened. After the two years, the licence automatically becomes a regular driving licence. Some ongoing training is offered, namely skid courses. These are voluntary courses, paid for by the novice drivers themselves. There is a penalty point system in France: licence holders initially have 12 points on their licence. If a driver violates the traffic rules he loses a certain number of points. The licence holder can regain these points by following specific courses.


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 63


4.2.2 Policy framework Denmark


In 1988 the Danish Road Safety Commission set a target that the number of people killed and injured in traffic should be reduced by 40-45% before the year 2000 This goal has not yet been reached. Consequently, we have boosted our efforts, for instance, through the government's action plan 'One accident is one too many'. The Road Directorate works jointly with the police, the Road Safety Commission, the Danish Road Safety Council, regional and local authorities and other national and international institutions to improve safety on Danish roads. Safer roads On the national roads, which carry about 23% of the road traffic volume, injuries account for 8% and fatalities for 13% of the total number of traffic accidents. This is because more than 50% of the national roads are motorways or expressways, which are much safer to use than other roads. Together with the rest of the road sector, the Road Directorate contributes to collecting and systematising the information on accidents occurring throughout the road network. The information is compiled and co-ordinated in the road databank VIS, thus making it available to technicians and administrators in the road administrations. The Road Directorate also co-ordinates road standards work, determining the optimum design of individual road elements in consideration of, for instance, road safety. These activities have entailed a wider user of roundabouts to replace ordinary intersections. Roundabouts generate only 20% of the personal injuries found in ordinary intersections. The road standards covering speed bumps came about after thorough analyses in co-operation with drivers' and operators' associations and have now - after a transition period - become mandatory. Active involvement The Road Directorate functions as secretariat to the group, which follows up on the road safety action, plan on behalf of the Minister of Transport. The plan operates on four target areas: speed must be lowered, drunken driving must be limited, cyclists must be better safeguarded and the number of accidents in intersections must be reduced. Employing our extensive knowledge of road user behaviour, we have developed a range of methods which are available to the other road administrations, and which are reflected in specific instructions for designing environment prioritised urban through roads. The methods can be used to design traffic areas that reflect the needs of citizens, pedestrians and bicyclists rather than drivers' need to go fast. They provide markedly improved safety as well as an improved urban environment.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 64


Discover accidents before they happen Studies in Denmark and other countries show that almost 25% of traffic accidents could be avoided, if all road installations had been designed for optimum safety from the beginning. The Road Directorate has developed a systematic road safety audit scheme for new road installations and has trained safety auditors who can independently go through road plans as a supplement to the considerations made by the designing engineer. Significant efforts towards safer traffic must be made in local communities for the regional and local roads. The Ministry of Transport has chosen to further this work by setting aside funds to encourage regional and local authorities to work on local road safety plans. Accidents are expensive As an aspect of political decision-making, the Road Directorate creates an overview of the costs inherent in traffic accidents. In co-operation with Odense University and others, we have revised the statement of costs for treatment of traffic victims. Local authorities are especially hard hit. The studies have elucidated how accident costs burden both private and public budgets. They also show that it 'pays' to prevent traffic accidents - for central, regional and local governments - and especially for the person involved in the accident. Target areas of the Ministry of Transport Action Plan for Improved Safety Accidents must be combated in connection with: • speeding • alcohol • cyclists • intersections


For drivers under 21 years of C and C+E categories a certificate for professional competence (CPC) is compulsory. For all drivers of D and D+E categories who are extended to regulation 3820/85 and convention AETR, a certificate for professional competence is compulsory. In addition, one year in national traffic and two years in international traffic of driving experience in a category C vehicle or in a category D vehicle traveling within an area within a 50 km radius from where the vehicle is normally based is demanded. There are separate tests for the certificate of professional competence and for the driving license. The CPC can be obtained as from the age of 18 years for C and C+E categories and 21 years for D and D+E categories. The training for the CPC is compulsory and generally consists of both theory and practical training.

2266 SSoouurrccee:: TTrraaffffiicc DDeeppaarrttmmeenntt ooff tthhee DDaanniisshh PPoolliiccee..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 65


On average 37 lessons (theory and practical) are provided in category C and 74 lessons (theory and practical) are provided in category D. The theory training relates among others to economical driving, national and international traffic rules, measures at road accidents or other accidents (for instance fire) concerning the insurance conditions of vehicles, the use of the tachograph and knowledge to vehicle- and transport documents demanded at national and international transport. Concerning transport of persons there is furthermore theory and practical training consisting among others of driving under slippery condition, first aid, advanced driving and fire fighting techniques. The Ministry of Education (Frederiksholms Kanal 21-25, 1220 København K) is responsible for the content and duration of the training and for organizing the training for the CPC and for the issuing of the documents.

Continuous training

In Denmark, continuous training for professional drivers of vehicles of C, C+E, D and D+E categories exists, but is not compulsory. The Ministry of Education is responsible for this training.


In Denmark, a student can only learn how to drive at a driving school. Candidates must follow a minimum number of theory and practical lessons to be admitted to the practical test: Category A: 26 theory lessons and 22 practical lessons

Category B: 26 theory lessons and 20 practical lessons (spread over a minimum training period of

14 days)

Category B+E: 4 theory lessons and 6 practical lessons

Category C: 16 theory lessons and 18 practical lessons

Category C+E: 13 theory lessons and 20 practical lessons

Category D: 16 theory lessons and 18 practical lessons

Category D+E: 10 theory lessons and 8 practical lessons

Candidates must also pass a theory test and keep a logbook.


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 66


It is necessary to indicate that the driver is still learning by displaying a sign with the text “driving school” on the car. The driving instructor at the driving school has legal responsibility for the vehicle during training.


In Denmark there are no measures after the issue of a driving licence.

4.2.3 Policy framework Germany

Information on the general road safety policy can be found in paragraph 5.2.4.


In Germany, if the driver is under 21 years, the Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) is compulsory for the professional transport of goods (C and C+E categories). The candidate can obtain his driving licence C and C+E as from the age of 18 years. For the transport of passengers (D and D+E categories), the driving licence can only be obtained as of the age of 21 years. Here, a CPC is not required. The tests for the certificate of professional competence are distinct from the practical driving test, but have to take place within the same period of obtention of the category C and C+E licence. The training for the CPC consists of theory and practical training. Theory training:

• National and International Highway codes • Freight delivery regulations • Accident prevention • Social regulations • Tax regulations • Technical aspects of the vehicle • Customer care • Information and communication technology

Practical training

2288 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA 2299 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 67


• Defensive, social and environmentally driving with a D or C, C+E combination on public roads

• Special transports (animals, heavy transports,…) • Communication with the customer: case studies • Route planning, freight control and delivery • What to do after an accident • Technical aspects of the vehicle

In Germany, a CPC is also compulsory for taxi drivers, ambulances, transport of dangerous goods, drivers of rental cars and drivers of vehicles used for scheduled transport of passengers. The CPC and the certificate for the transport of dangerous goods is issued by the chamber of commerce, the Industrie und Handelskammer, (DIHK – Bildungs GmbH, Adenauerallee 148, D-53113 Bonn). For taxi drivers, rental cars, vehicles used for scheduled public transport and ambulances the certificate for professional competence is issued by the authorities responsible for driving licences. Continuous training for professional drivers In Germany, continuous training for professional drivers of vehicles of C, C+E, D and D+E categories exists, but is not compulsory. The non-compulsory continuous training is mainly organised by vehicle manufacturers, training centres, the DEKRA and TÜV academies.


In Germany, a student can only learn how to drive at a driving school. A student must follow a minimum number of theory lessons (each lesson takes 45 minutes) to be admitted to the practical test: Categories A and A1: 32 theory lessons

Category B: 28 theory lessons

Category B+E1: 28 theory lessons Category C1: 36 theory lessons Category C1+E2: 32 theory lessons Category C: 44 theory lessons Category C+E2: 32 theory lessons Category D13: 44 theory lessons Category D1+E3: 44 theory lessons 3300 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 68


Category D3: 60 theory lessons Category D+E3: 60 theory lessons

1. the theory test for category B+E is included in the test for category 2. the theory test for C1+E and C+E is the same 3. the theory test for D1 and D1+E is the same; the theory test for D and D+E is the same

Candidates are also required to follow a minimum number of special lessons (“Sonderfahrten”) to be admitted to the practical test: Category A and A1: 12 practical lessons

Category B: 12 practical lessons Category B+E: 5 practical lessons Category C1 and C1+E: 5 practical lessons Category C and C+E: 10 practical lessons Category D1: 15 practical lessons Category D1+E: 5 practical lessons Category D: 25 practical lessons Category D+E: 5 practical lessons During the practical training, at least 4 hours on the motorway and 3 hours of night time driving are obligatory. After having completed the required number of training hours, the student obtains a certificate of his training from the driving school. On average, a candidate takes 24 hours of theory and 30 hours of practical training. It is not necessary to indicate on the vehicle that the driver is a student. During the training, the instructor has legal responsibility for the vehicle.


In Germany, a system with probational licensing exists for the first driving licence. The probational licence is valid for 2 years (which is recorded on the credit card licence) after which it is automatically converted into a full driving licence. The probationary period can not be shortened. If a novice driver commits one serious or two less serious traffic violations within the probationary period, he or she may be subject to corrective or selective measures imposed by the local competent administrative authority. These measures may consist of driver improvement courses, a written warning, up to withdrawal of the licence and medical and psychological reports. If one of these measures occur, the probationary period is automatically


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 69


extended by two years. It is not necessary to indicate on the car that the driver of the vehicle has a probational licence. All licence holders can participate in safety training on a voluntary basis. Apart from the licence on probation for novice drivers during the first two years after having obtained the driving licence, a penalty point system exists for all holders of a German driving licence, independent of the age or how long they have held their licence. Depending on the traffic offence a certain number of penalty points is given. If within a certain set period of time a driver reaches between 8 and 13 penalty points, the offender will receive a written warning. The driver in this case can get a penalty point discount of 2 to 4 points if he or she participates in a driver improvement course. If the driver reaches within the set period of time between 14 and 17 penalty points, he or she will be forced to participate in a driver improvement course. If he or she undergoes a voluntary traffic psychological consultation he or she will receive a penalty point discount of 2 points. If within the set period of time a driver reaches 18 penalty points, the licence will be withdrawn.

4.2.4 Policy framework Sweden


The road transport system is to be designed so that no one is killed or seriously injured in traffic. It will therefore gradually be designed to reflect human ability and the level of external violence that the human body can withstand. The road safety policy adopted by the Swedish National Road Administration (Vägverket) emphasises that the work in this field is based on protecting human life and well-being. We shall, with the protection of human life and well-being as the basis,

• create a road environment that minimises the risk of road users making mistakes and that prevents serious human injury when designing, operating and maintaining the state road network;

• set an example in our own operations through the quality assurance (from a road safety perspective) of journeys and transports in all areas of activity, both those undertaken in-house and those contracted;

• analyse accidents that have resulted in death or serious injury in traffic and, where feasible, initiate suitable measures so as to avoid the repetition of such accidents;

• stimulate all players within the road transport system to work resolutely towards achieving mutually targeted objectives;

• conduct the work on road safety in close co-operation with all players within the road transport system;

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 70


• take advantage of and further develop the commitment of the general public to safer traffic.

The Swedish National Road Administration has been commissioned with the overall responsibility for road safety within the road transport system. Every head of division is responsible for the effect his/her area of responsibility has on road safety. Road safety endeavours shall be conducted as an integral part of other operations.

• In its capacity as the central administrative agency responsible for the entire road transport system, the Swedish National Road Administration has been commissioned with the overall responsibility for road safety within the road transport system and shall monitor and actively promote developments within this area. This also means an obligation to endeavour to improve the transport system as a whole as required by road safety considerations;

• In its capacity as road manager the Swedish National Road Administration is responsible for road safety on the state road network. Included in this responsibility is that the construction and maintenance works contracted by the Swedish National Road Administration shall be subjected to stringent environmental demands and that the Administration shall encourage contractors to develop production methods that are adapted to road safety;

• As an organisation the Swedish National Road Administration is responsible for road safety in all internal activities. Our dominant position as a road authority offers us a great potential for being able to promote road safety considerations in technological developments relevant to our sphere of operations;

• The Director-General is ultimately responsible to the Board of Directors for ensuring that road safety is taken into consideration within all areas of operation at the Swedish National Road Administration;

• Every head of division is to ensure that road safety is taken into consideration within his/her area of responsibility. He/she shall also endeavour to ensure that fellow colleagues increase their awareness and knowledge about the impact of their own activities and that of the entire road transport system on road safety. It is also incumbent on him/her to set the style and through his/her leadership strive to increase road safety awareness. This obligation also includes ensuring adherence to this policy;

• Every employee at the Swedish National Road Administration shall be familiar with the road safety policy and work according to its intentions;

• All employees are expected to set a good example through respecting traffic rules and otherwise exhibiting good conduct in traffic, both during and outside working hours.

The Traffic Safety Department monitors the work conducted on road safety within the entire organisation and throughout the road transport system as a whole.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 71



In Sweden, the minimum age for obtaining a driving licence for the transport of goods (categories C and C+E) is 18 years. For the transport of goods, under the age of 21, a certificate of professional competence (CPC) is compulsory. The CPC can be obtained as from the age of 18 years. Training for the CPC however can start at the age of 16 years in the vocational programme of the upper secondary school. It is a course parallel to the category C license training. For the transport of persons (categories D and D+E), the minimum age for obtaining a driving licence is 21 years. The CPC can be obtained as from the age of 21 years for D category. For C+E and D+E categories, no separate CPC exists, since the test for the CPC exists only for the towing vehicle. Over the age of 21 years, a CPC is not compulsory for category C. For category D, a CPC is compulsory. However, it is not required when driving a bus closer than 50 km from where the vehicle usually is stationed. If the driver has been working as a bus driver or a as driver of heavy lorries for altogether more than one year, a written attest from the employer/employers will be accepted as a CPC for D category (on longer distances). In that case you do not need to go to an exam in order to get a “real” CPC certificate (but you can voluntarily do that). In Sweden, the training system for the CPC is considered as learning. The learning is compulsory but not attendance at specific courses. It is totally up to the candidate to decide how to do that, if not in vocational program as mentioned above. The candidate can attend courses offered by different organisations or do it by getting text-material and doing their own learning. In short “You need to have the competence, not necessarily the courses” Theory training is settled by the national curriculum, but the practical outlines of this training (lectures, courses, self studies etc.) are free. The result of the training is checked by a test. In this context, there is no specific amount of lessons, nor is there an amount of lessons to be taken. The content of the theory training covers six main areas:

• Map reading competencies • Economical driving • Security requirements • Legal aspects (traffic legislation and legislation concerning commercial transports) • Administration • Vehicle knowledge


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 72


Upper secondary schools, driving schools, business organisations for bus and truck companies are offering CPC training. The examination for CPC certificates is done by or under the authority of the Public Transport and Commercial Traffic Division of Vägverket (Swedish National Road Administration, SE-78187 Borlänge). The Swedish National Road Administration also issues the certificates. In the year 2000, 2429 certificates of professional competence were issued for category C and 1995 for category D. There is a special certification for taxi drivers, handled much the same way as CPC for C and D categories. Drivers of vehicles for the transport of dangerous goods also need to be certified. The Swedish Rescue Services Agency is responsible for this training and is also issuing the certificates Continuous training for professional drivers In Sweden, continuous training for professional drivers of vehicles of C, C+E, D and D+E categories exists, but is not compulsory. Vägverket (www.vv.se), TYA (Transportunions co-op) (www.tya.se) and Erudio Transportutbildningen (www.erudio.nu) offer these courses. It is up to the bus or trucking companies to organise these courses. Some new activities, like eco-driving, have proved to be of some interest.


In Sweden, a student has two possibilities to learn how to drive: 1. theory and practical training at a driving school 2. theory and practical training with a non-professional supervisor A candidate can also complete his or her theory and practical training during military service or begin theory and practical training for categories B, C, D and E at school. None of the systems require a minimum number of theory or practical lessons to be taken. However, all students must complete a skid course, which takes about 4 hours. In system 2, both the student and the non-professional supervisor must meet certain conditions. The student must:

• have reached the minimum age to start practical training, depending on the category • pass a medical examination (group 2) or complete a declaration on the honour (group 1) • have a training certificate (showing personal and medical fitness).


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 73

http://www.vv.se/


The non-professional supervisor must: • have held a driving licence for at least 5 years • be at least 24 years old • be in possession of a special learner’s permit from the regional authority, (connected to

the Driving Licence Registry) which has a validity of 48 months. This period of validity can not be extended or shortened.

There are no restrictions in Sweden when training at a driving school or with a non-professional supervisor, except for category A. When training with a non-professional supervisor for the categories A1, A-restricted and A-unrestricted, the accompanying driver has to ride on the rear of the student’s motorcycle or on another motorcycle. A sign with the words "Driver Learning" must be displayed on the car. The plate is red if it concerns a driving school and green if it concerns a learner under training with a non-professional supervisor. Double commands are not necessary during the training. Students take an average of 20 to 25 hours of theory training and approximately 25 to 30 hours of practical training. The driving instructor or the accompanying driver has legal responsibility for the vehicle during training. Before taking the theory test, the candidate must show a certificate signed by the non-professional supervisor or the driving instructor stating that the subjects required by the Swedish curriculum have been learned by the candidate.


A probational licensing system exists in Sweden for the first licence a novice driver obtains. Usually this is a licence for category A or B. The probational licence is valid for two years after which it is automatically exchanged for a full driving licence. This period cannot be shortened or extended. Holders of a probational licence must pass new theory and practical tests if the licence is withdrawn, even if only for a short time. No ongoing training is offered in Sweden. There is no obligation to display a sign on the car indicating that a probational licence holder is driving it.

4.2.5 Policy framework The Netherlands

General information on road safety policies can be found in paragraph 5.2.5.


In the Netherlands, the certificate of professional competence (CPC) is compulsory for all professional drivers (born after June 1955) for the transport of goods and the transport of


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 74


persons (driving licences categories C, C+E, D and D+E) and for the transport of dangerous goods. The minimum age for obtaining driving licence categories C, C+E, D and D+E is 18 years. If a candidate however wants to become a professional driver, the candidate has to succeed in the vakbekwaamheidstest, a test proving his professional competence. The exam for the professional competence covers three main areas: Traffic regulations with respect to the vehicle, technical aspects of the vehicle and administrative matters relating to the transport of goods/persons. Succeeding in the exam leads to the diploma vakbekwaamheid CCV-B, the CPC. There are different exams for the transport of goods, persons and the transport of dangerous goods. The training for the CPC is not compulsory. However, it is widely attended. In general, it consists of 110 hours of theory training spread over the three main areas covered by the exam. The subjects are traffic (30 hours), transport of persons/goods administration (30 hours) and of technical aspects of the vehicle (40 hours). There is no practical training for the CPC. The organisations responsible for the training are TLN (Transport Logistiek Nederland, Plein Van de Verenigde Naties 15, PO Box 3008, 2700 KS Zoetermeer), the employers’ and employees’ organisation EVO (evo ondernemersorganisatie voor logistiek en transport, Kadelaan 6, 2725 BL Zoetermeer). These organisations are represented in the CCV board. The CCV (Contactcommissie Chauffeurs Vakbekwaamheid, PC Boutenslaan 1, 2283 GT Rijswijk ZH, +31 70 3720 700), a division of the driving license authority CBR, is the organisation responsible for the issuing the CPC. The certificate of professional competence is voluntary for both taxi and ambulance drivers. In the year 2000, 11080 certificates of professional competence were issued. Continuous training for professional drivers In the Netherlands, continuous training for professional drivers of vehicles of C, C+E, D and D+E categories exists, but is not compulsory. Training is organised by several organisations e.g. VTL. In general, the training deals with specific aspects of driving, like defensive driving and environmentally friendly driving. The CCV (mentioned above) does not organise continuous training, but analyses the driving capacities of professional drivers in the transport industry (coach companies, taxi companies) and fire brigades. It is important to mention that if a coach company wants to obtain the Coachmark label, the CCV-certification is required for the drivers of that company.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 75



In the Netherlands, driving lessons may only be given by a driving school. Theory training for categories A, B, C and D, however, can also be done at home. No minimum number of lessons needs to be taken in order to be admitted to the driving test. The average number of practical lessons for category B is estimated at 35 hours. To be allowed to sit the practical test, a candidate must have passed the theory test. It is compulsory for the training vehicle from the driving school to have an visible “L” -sign to indicate that the driver is still learning. The driving instructor at the driving school has legal responsibility for the vehicle during training.


There are no further measures once a driving licence in the Netherlands has been obtained. However, for the non-professional driver, several ongoing training courses are offered, all on a voluntary basis: a general refresher course, economically friendly driving, environmentally friendly driving, skid courses and defensive driving.

4.2.6 Policy framework Austria


Nowadays road safety is an important issue in the Austrian traffic policy. Since the beginning of the 1980 traffic safety is an important issue in the Austrian traffic policy. The priority of traffic safety also influences the objectives of the Austrian government and the creation of coalitions. Central in the traffic safety policy of the Austrian government stands the EU-Whitebook. It gives a reflection of the traffic policy. Actions concerning the traffic safety policy in Austria are based on the three following principles: • Traffic planning seen from a broader perspective. This principle incorporates measures in

the field of infrastructure. The traffic political goal is to develop an optimised infrastructure in Austria. The Bundesverkehrswegenplan, which was developed in 1998, serves as a masterplan and could be seen as the tool for developing the optimised infrastructure;

• Traffic planning in a more narrow perspective. Actions like the promotion of rail, the avoiding of traffic and the internalising of external costs. These measures are meant to result


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 76


in a more environmental friendly modal split by using more durable vehicles. It is evident that by incorporating such measures, traffic safety will be improved.

• Legalistic actions. Legal measures are making a great contribution in increasing the awareness and which must not be underestimated.

• Information campaigns to influence driving behaviour. The traffic policy should not limit itself here by only focussing on the popular measures. Less popular measures, such as driving with the headlights on, should also be taken. Special initiatives focussed on particular target groups should also be taken here. Safe drivers should have an enhanced social prestige.

Knowing that a major part of the Austrian roads is used by foreign drivers, especially professional drivers, the Austrian policy makers are very aware that to enhance road safety it is necessary to look at road safety not only at a national point of view but also on an international level. The safety standards for coaches and trucks from a bi- or multinational origin operating in Austria for example should meet the same level as the coaches and trucks in Austria. Taking the estimated increase of traffic into regard an offensive traffic policy on a European scale can be seen as absolutely necessary.


In Austria, the minimum age for obtaining driving licence category C and C+E (transport of goods) is 18 years. For categories D and D+E (transport of persons), this is 21 years. Under the age of 21 however, a certificate of professional competence (CPC) is compulsory for professional drivers for the transport of goods (categories C, C+E) and the transport of persons (categories) D and D+E. A CPC is also required for professional drivers of taxis and vehicles used for the transport of dangerous goods; professional drivers of vehicles with a maximum authorised mass exceeding 7,500 kg and who have not reached the age of 21. The CPC is not compulsory for professional drivers in categories C, C+E, D and D+E older than 21. For the Certificate of Professional Competence the candidate has to pass separate tests. The training for the CPC can start at the minimum age of 16 years for theory training and 17 years for practical training. In Austria, the training system for the CPC is a dual system: In the first system, the candidate follows three years of theory and practical training. In the second system, the candidate follows 168 hours of theory and practical training.

3388 SSoouurrccee:: BBuunnddeessmmiinniisstteerriiuumm ffüürr VVeerrkkeehhrr,, IInnnnoovvaattiioonn uunndd TTeecchhnnoollooggiiee..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 77


The theory training consists of: • Vehicle mechanics and maintenance • Freight and loading techniques (Securing the load, dynamics while driving) • Administration and commercial techniques • Calculation • Legal aspects • Accident prevention and health care • Job related expressions in foreign languages • Geography and route planning • National and international regulations with respect to goods carriage, AETR • Customs procedures and board documents

The practical training consists of:

• Vehicle and engine use • Product knowledge • Practical skills such as bending, boring, polishing, sharpen, sawing etc. • Turning with C, C+E, D, D+E vehicles • Vehicle maintenance, reparation en diagnostics • Applying theory training

Driving schools and chambers of commerce are, under the authority of the Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie responsible for the CPC training. The certificate is issued by the chamber of commerce (Wiedner Haupstrasse 63, 1-1045 Vienna). It is unknown how many CPC’s were issued in the year 2000.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 78


Continuous training for professional drivers In Austria, continuous training for professional drivers of vehicles of C, C+E, D and D+E categories exists, but is not compulsory. The non-compulsory continuous training is mainly organised by driving schools. The topics of the voluntary continuous training vary from training school to training school.


In Austria a student has three options when learning how to drive: 1. complete theory and practical training at a driving school 2. begin the theory and practical training at a driving school, followed by training with a

non-professional supervisor (all categories except category A) 3. complete theory and practical training at a driving school, combined with educational

training drives with a non-professional supervisor (category B only) The minimum age for starting the driving education for category B in the different systems is as follows: • system 1: 17.5 • system 2: 17.5 • system 3: 16 In system 1, a student has to follow a minimum of 40 hours of theory training and 20 hours of practical training. On average a student takes only this number of lessons. In system 2, a student has to follow a minimum of 8 hours of theory training and 8 hours of practical training at a driving school before being allowed to drive with his or her non-professional supervisor. The vehicle used in the non-professional drives must be marked with the plate ‘L Übungsfahrt’. In system 3, a student has to follow a complete theory and practical course at a driving school, meaning 40 hours of theory training and 20 hours of practical training. These hours are divided into a basic training before the educational training drives begin, two accompanying hours during the educational training drives and a training to perfect driving skills after having concluded the educational training drives. During the educational training drives the student is accompanied by a non-professional supervisor. The student has to keep to certain speed restrictions: 80 km/h on secondary roads, 100 km/h on highways. In the period of educational training drives the student has to drive at least 3000 km. To be able to check this, the student has to keep notes of his or her drives. The vehicle used in the educational drives must be marked with the shield ‘L17 Ausbildungsfahrt’.


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 79


In this system, a student can get his or her driving licence at the age of 17. Until his or her 18th birthday however, a shield reading ‘L 17' has to be attached to the vehicle. Also a speed limit of 80 km/h on secondary roads and 100 km/h on highways must be observed until the age of 18. In both system 2 and system 3, there are some extra conditions for both the trainer and the trainee:

• the supervisor must have held his or her driving licence fort least 7 years • the supervisor may not have committed any serious traffic offences • the maximum blood alcohol level for both the supervisor and the student is 0.1‰ • a special permit from the official authorities is needed • the student must present a certificate of medical capability • the vehicles used does not need dual controls

To be admitted to the practical test, a student must have passed the theory test and he must be able to show a logbook and proof of having driven on motorways and secondary roads, by day as well as by night.


In Austria, a probational licensing system exists for the first-time issue of licences in categories A, B, C1, C and D. Holders of a probational licence have to observe a maximum blood alcohol level of 0.1 ‰ and have to continue training if they demonstrate poor behaviour (eventually followed by withdrawal of the probational licence). If a novice driver exceeds the maximum allowed blood alcohol level, or commits other traffic offences, he or she must participate in a psychological driver improvement course. On top of this, the probationary period is also extended by one year. The authorities can prolong the probational period up to three times, each time with one year. If the holder of a probational licence commits another offence after the third prolongation, the licence can be withdrawn. The restrictions of a probational licence are valid for 2 years after which the licence will automatically be converted into a regular driving licence. It is not possible to shorten the probationary period. The fact that the novice driver is in the possession of a driving licence on probation is not marked on the driving licence document. Only the date of issue of the document indicates that the novice driver is still on probation. In case of extension of the probationary period the licence is marked with a stamp. It is not necessary to indicate on the vehicle that the driver is in the possession of a probationary licence. It is not necessary to indicate on the car that the driver of the vehicle has a probational licence.


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 80


Novice drivers are offered the possibility to follow a training in technical security, but this is not compulsory.

4.2.7 Policy framework Ireland


Probably the most challenging task facing the Irish Government in the next 3 - 5 years is to sustain the competitiveness of the Irish economy, building on the phenomenal growth in recent years. It is widely accepted that competitiveness - the ability to attract and retain business in domestic and foreign markets - is the cornerstone of this economic success. Economic policy is, therefore, geared towards ensuring that Ireland remains competitive in the increasingly global marketplace. Maintaining competitiveness is a particularly high priority in the transport, energy and communications sectors. Thus the essential task identified by the Department in its previous Strategy Statement of being “the driving force for the development of these sectors so that national competitiveness can be enhanced to the greatest extent possible” remains very much a priority for the lifetime of this Statement. Of vital importance in our continuing efforts to ensure Ireland remains a competitive location for inward investment, particularly in IT/e-commerce ventures, is that we also ensure the provision of the necessary transport, communications and energy infrastructure. The Department has noted the OECD’s recent report on Regulatory Reform in Ireland and its clear assertion that weak competition in key areas threatens future economic performance. We remain convinced that we must continue to act as a driver for change within our sectors so as to keep sustained competitiveness at the top of the economic agenda. Regulation One of the Department’s high-level objectives, which it set for itself in its 1997 Statement of Strategy, was to provide for an effective regulatory framework for the transport, energy and communications sectors in such a way as to strike a balance between independence and accountability. Properly designed and implemented, regulation is a powerful means of achieving sustained economic performance, international competitiveness and job creation. The liberalisation agenda has brought sharply into focus the issue of regulation and how best this should be carried out so as to ensure fairness to all market operators, encourage and sustain competitiveness and provide the necessary safeguards to consumers. In the transformation from monopoly markets to openly competitive ones, regulation is required to allow market entry, ensure a level playing pitch for all operators, protect consumer interests and ensure access to a reasonably priced basic level of service for all.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 81


The primary focus in the continuing development of an overall regulatory framework is that it is pro-competition and free of unnecessary regulations that actually restrict or inhibit innovation and enterprise. Ownership In light of the economic realities facing Ireland to-day and, in particular, given our obligations as members of the EU, the issue of State ownership is no longer as clear-cut or as easy to reconcile with wider policy responsibilities as in the past. It is appropriate that the Department continues to critically review the rationale for its continued ownership of the commercial State companies. We will not approach this in a doctrinaire fashion. Instead, questions about future ownership will be determined on a case-by-case basis in the context of developments in the sectors. Total divestment of the State asset may not always be the most appropriate response and, for that reason, initiatives such as strategic alliances or minority IPOs will also be considered as possible solutions to future strategic direction in certain instances. Infrastructure Ireland’s recent economic success has highlighted significant deficiencies in the quality and availability of essential infrastructure. Whether it be airports, public transport systems, electricity/gas supply or telecommunications infrastructure, the economic boom, with its attendant increased demand across the sectors, has highlighted the critical importance of having sufficient good quality infrastructure. It is imperative that Ireland now augments the supply and quality of its infrastructure, in order to maintain competitiveness and expand the productive potential of the economy in the coming years. In short, the likely medium term growth rates for the economy are critically dependent on existing infrastructure bottlenecks being tackled and new strategic infrastructures being implemented. Sustained economic growth is highly dependent on quality infrastructure, be it in terms of reduced traffic congestion, security of energy supply or a modern telecommunications system. The Department will work with the implementing agencies to ensure that the necessary investment aimed at enhancing our country’s infrastructure takes place in a timely manner. The National Development Plan lays the foundations for our future economic and social development. It clearly establishes the importance of infrastructure in terms of future economic success and has as its primary objective to ensure that Ireland remains competitive in the global international marketplace. A key element in meeting this objective is a major investment programme in economic and social infrastructure. This programme has to be implemented in a manner that ensures timely delivery of projects and must also foster more balanced regional development. The Department will continue to work closely with our colleagues in the Department of Environment and Local Government in shaping a National Spatial Strategy that best supports

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 82


continued economic progress and that contributes positively towards the attainment of regional economic convergence. This will be one of the Department’s key objectives in managing the expenditure in the NDP for which it is responsible.


Policy Framework for Ireland Major improvements in Irish road safety have in fact taken place over the past 20 years: the annual road death toll had reached into the 600s during the 1970s, whereas for the past decade it has stood in the 400s. This significant improvement follows a trend in most developed countries, and has been achieved in the face of increasing traffic volumes and road travel. A range of factors has been involved in delivering it, among others:

• more precautionary regulations in relation to seat belts, speed limits and other key factors designed to influence road user behaviour,

• better enforcement, road engineering and public awareness, and • improved safety design in road vehicles.

The Government Strategy for Road Safety 1998 – 2002 establishes quantified targets for achieving its objectives, the principal of which is to reduce road deaths and serious injuries each by at least 20% by 2002 relative to 1997. Priority is accorded by the Strategy to actions targeted at speeding, alcohol, seat belt wearing and vulnerable road users. A timetable for key actions in these and other areas is also set out. There is no acceptable rate of road fatalities or injuries. But real and worthwhile gains are being made in road safety within the framework of the Government Strategy. The total number of road deaths for 2001 represents a 13% decrease on the 1997 level of 472. Provisional figures relating to serious injuries indicate a 43% reduction in 2001 on the 1997 levels. The interim targets fixed by the Strategy for achievement by 2000 have been well met. By reference to the estimates set out in the Road Safety Strategy in 1998, over 100 lives are now being saved each year as a result of implementing the Strategy compared to a continuation of trends prior to 1998. Driver Training Driving instructors must have appropriate insurance cover and hold a full driving licence for the category of vehicle in which driving instruction is being given. Many driving instructors are currently enrolled under the voluntary registration, which involves driving instructors undergoing an examination procedure in order to become enrolled on the register.


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 83


Proposals now being developed by government provide for the regulation and quality assurance of driving instruction involve a test of the competence of individual instructors, or exemption from this requirement where an instructor is accredited to an organization of driving instructors recognized as meeting appropriate quality standards. The design of these standards is at present being formulated by a working group comprising of government officials and representatives of instruction interests. It is envisaged that as part of this process an organization will have to seek accreditation from the National Accreditation Board that they are operating to a set standard. The legislative basis for implementing these proposals has been updated in the recently enacted Road Traffic Act 2002.

Certificate of Professional Competence Courses to obtain a CPC are operated by: The Chartered Institute of Transport in Ireland, 1 Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2 Telephone:+353.1.6763188 Conditions before obtaining a driving licence In Ireland, persons who wish to learn to drive must pass a theory test before being eligible for a provisional driving licence which enables them to learn to drive and then undergo a practical driving test. Learners while driving under a provisional licence must generally be accompanied by and under the supervision of a licence holder but this person need not necessarily be a professional driving instructor. Provisionally licensed drivers, except motorcycle riders, must display ”L” plates to the front and rear of the vehicle. The plate should be a red “L” on a white background. They may not drive on a motorway, may not drive a vehicle drawing a trailer except when the provisional licence relates to a trailer category, and may not carry a passenger for reward. Provisional licences generally have a validity period of two years. Persons driving under a provisional licence may renew their licence on one occasion. In order to be eligible for a third such licence they must have undergone the driving test within the two years period prior to the date of application. Otherwise they may only get a one year provisional licence. Measures after having obtained a driving licence A commitment is given in the Government Strategy for Road Safety to the introduction of a penalty point system to track infringements of driving regulations with a view to improving the driving behaviour of those who recurringly commit these breaches.

The Road Traffic Act 2002 provides for the introduction of a penalty point s system. The system is designed to operate mainly on an administrative basis. Penalty points will be recorded

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 84


for 3 years and where a total of 12 is reached, the person will be automatically disqualified for 6 months. The driving disqualifications arising from the accumulation of 12 penalty points will be notified administratively through a computerised system co-ordinated by the Department of the Environment and Local Government. In addition to the passing of the relevant legislation, the relevant IT facilities must be put in place in order to allow for the recording of penalty points. In this context, the necessary software amendments to the National Driver File to record penalty points and administer the system, have been made. The successful operation of the penalty points system will also depend on information technology improvements being developed by the Garda Síochána and Courts Service. Developmental work on the relevant Information Technology systems for the Courts Service and the Garda Síochána is proceeding and it is understood that the full system of penalty points will be available by the end of 2003. In the meantime, given that it is generally accepted that excessive speed is the single contributory factor to both accidents and the degree of resulting injuries, penalty points have been introduced in relation to speeding offences only, with effect from the 31 October 2002. All licence holders will be treated in the same manner under the proposed system, unlike some other countries, where provisional licence holders are subject to disqualification arising as a result of the accumulation of a lower number of points.

4.2.8 Policy framework Czech Republic42


On 1. January 2001 new laws and regulations on road traffic came into force in the Czech Republic. One of the areas maintained by new Law No 361/2000 and especially Law No 247/2000 is the area of driving licences and drivers licence applicants testing. The main purpose of the changes which are listed below is to improve the whole system and to make it compatible with EC legislation on this field, mainly with 91/439/ EEC directive on driving licences. The main changes in new Czech legislation are as follows: • Introduction of subcategories A1, B1, C1, C1+E, D1 and D1+E; • Introduction of new national category AM for moped in line with EC definition; • Introduction of new definition of the A category;

4422 PPrreeppaarreedd bbyy TTrraannssppoorrtt RReesseeaarrcchh CCeennttrree ((CCDDVV)),, CCzzeecchh RReeppuubblliicc..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 85


• Extension of the length of practical tests for AM, A, B, B+E, T, A1 and B1 categories and subcategories for at least 30 minutes;

• Extension of the length of practical tests for other categories and subcategories for at least 50 minutes;

• Introduction of exercise of obligatory manoeuvres during the first part of the practical test, which lasts at least 10 minutes (this time is not included to the test in real traffic);

• Introduction of questions on techniques into the theoretical test; • Introduction of new traffic situations in the theoretical test from the point of view of tested

driver; • Introduction of new models of driving licence; • New demands for cars used in practical tests in line with demands of 91/439/EEC directive; • Driving licences issue and maintaining is moved to the responsibility of the Ministry of

Transport and Communications and local authorities respectively. The following table gives an overview of number of theoretical lessons, which should be passed during the applicants training. Table 4.3 Lesson Category Highway

code Technical aspects

Theory and rules of safe driving

Medical training

Repeating and pre-testing

Total

AM 14 1 6 2 3 26 A1 14 1 6 2 3 26 A 14 1 6 2 3 26 B1 16 2 8 2 4 32 B 18 2 10 2 4 36 T 18 18 10 2 4 52 The following table gives an overview of the number of practical lessons which should be passed during the applicants training.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 86


Table 4.4 Practical training in driving

Practical training in driving I. stage

Testing ground

Minimal density of

Medium density of Traffic traffic

II. stage III. stage Medium densityof Traffic

Maintenance of vehicle

Medical issues

Total

AM 1 2 3 1 4 12 A1 1 2 4 5 1 4 17 A 1 2 5 5 1 4 18 B1 2 5 10 6 2 4 29 B 2 5 12 9 2 4 34 T 2 4 8 7 10 4 35

Category

1

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 87


Table 4.5 Extended training Lesson From category

to category Highway code

Technical aspects Theory and rules of safe driving

Medical trainingRepeating and pre-testing

Total

A1 to A 6 1 4 2 3 16 A1 to B1 8 2 5 2 3 20 A1 to B 12 2 5 2 3 24 A1 to T 12 16 8 2 4 42 A to B1 10 2 5 2 3 22 A to B 12 2 5 2 3 24 A to T 12 16 8 2 4 42 B1 to AM B1 to A1 B1 to A

6 1 3 2 4 16

B1 to B 8 2 5 2 3 20 B1 to T 10 15 8 2 5 40 B to AM B to A1 B to A

8 2 3 2 3 18

B to T 10 15 8 2 5 40 B to C1 B to C B to D1 B to D

10 15 10 2 5 42

C1 to AM C1 to A1 C1 to A

6 2 3 2 3 16

C1 to T C1 to C C1 to D1 C1 to D

8 12 6 2 4 32

C to AM C to A1 C to A

6 2 3 2 3 16

C to T C to D1 C to D

10 16 6 2 4 38

B to B+E D1 to D1+E D to D+E C1 to C1+E C to C+E

2 1 6 2 3 14

The following table gives an overview of the number of practical lessons which should be passed during the applicants extended training.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 88


Table 4.6 Practical training in driving43 Practical training in driving I. stage

From category to category

Total # lessons

Testing ground

Minimal density of

Medium density o

traffic

II. stage

f traffic

III. stage Medium density of traffic

Maintenance of vehicle

Medical issues

Total

A1 to A 7 0 2 2 3 1 2 10 A1 to B1 23 2 5 10 6 2 2 27 A1 to B 28 2 5 12 9 2 2 32 A1 to T 21 2 4 8 7 5 2 28 A to B1 23 2 5 10 6 2 2 27 A to B 28 2 5 12 9 2 2 32 A to T 21 2 4 8 7 5 2 28 B1 to AM B1 to A1B1 to A

7 12 13

1 1 1

2 2 2

2 4 5

2 5 5

1 1 1

2 2 2

10 15 16

B1 to B 16 0 4 6 6 2 2 20 B1 to T 19 0 6 6 7 5 2 26 B to AM B to A1 B to A

7 12 13

1 1 1

2 2 2

2 4 5

2 5 5

1 1 1

2 2 2

10 15 16

B to T 17 0 4 6 7 5 2 24 B to C1 B to C B to D1 D1 to D

33 33 34 24

0 0 0 0

6 6 8 4

16 16 14 10

11 11 12 10

8 8 6 8

4 4 4 4

45 45 44 36

CC11 ttoo AAMM CC11 ttoo AA11 CC11 ttoo AA

7 12 13

1 1 1

2 2 2

2 4 5

2 5 5

1 1 1

2 2 2

10 15 16

C1 to T C1 to C C1 to D1C1 to D

15 16 24 33

0 0 0 0

3 3 6 6

6 7 8 15

6 6 10 12

2 2 2 4

2 2 4 4

19 20 30 41

C to AM C to A1 C to A

7 12 13

1 1 1

2 2 2

2 4 5

2 5 5

1 1 1

2 2 2

10 15 16

C to T C to D1 C to D

12 20 25

0 0 0

4 6 5

4 6 10

4 8 10

2 2 4

2 4 4

20 26 33

B to B+E D1 to D1+E D to D+E C1/C to C/C1+E

0 2 2 4 2 2 12

4433 SSoouurrccee:: LLaawwss NNooss 224477//22000000 aanndd 336611//22000000..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 89



A certificate exists for: • categories A, B, C, D and E in TIR

The test for the Certificate of Professional Competence is taken separately from a driving test. “CESMAD” is responsible for the Certificate of Professional Competence of TIR drivers whereas local authorities are responsible for the other certificates.



4.2.9 Policy framework United Kingdom

Specific information on training for professional drivers In accordance with the Road Safety Strategy, it is intended to set up statutory training schemes for lorry and bus drivers and a register of instructors to deliver the training courses. However, the Commission has published a draft directive on the training of professional drivers for the carriage of goods or passengers by road. The outcome of current negotiations is now awaited in order to implement statutory training in this country47. Certificate of professional competence The minimum age for obtaining of driving licence categories C, C+E, D and D+E is 21 years. However, those under 21 and minimum 18 years seeking a large goods vehicle (LGV) driving licence C, C+E must obtain the certificate48 through the Young LGV Driver Training Scheme administered by the Road Haulage Distribution Training Council (RHDTC). Around 300 drivers have used the scheme in the last three years. There is no equivalent scheme for young drivers of a PCV (Passenger Carrying Vehicle), although bus companies do make use of

4444 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA 4455 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA 4466 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA 4477 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn aabboouutt vvoolluunnttaarryy ttrraaiinniinngg sscchheemmeess ooppeerraatteedd bbyy tthhee FFrreeiigghhtt TTrraannssppoorrtt AAssssoocciiaattiioonn ccaann bbee

ffoouunndd oonn www.fta.co.uk aanndd ddeettaaiillss ooff tthhoossee pprroovviiddeedd bbyy tthhee RRooaadd HHaauullaaggee aanndd DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn TTrraaiinniinngg CCoouunncciill ((RRHHDDTTCC)) ccaann bbee vviieewweedd aatt www.rhdtc.co.uk..

www.fta.co.ukwww.rhdtc.co.uk

4488 PPlleeaassee nnoottee tthhaatt iinn tthhee UUKK tthhee eexxpprreessssiioonn ““CCeerrttiiffiiccaattee ooff PPrrooffeessssiioonnaall CCoommppeetteennccee”” hhaass aa ddiiffffeerreenntt mmeeaanniinngg aanndd ggeenneerraallllyy rreeffeerrss ttoo tthhee qquuaalliiffiiccaattiioonn rreeqquuiirreedd ffoorr aannyyoonnee ooppeerraattiinngg aa bbuussiinneessss// ccoommppaannyy ffoorr ccaarrrryyiinngg ggooooddss oorr ppaasssseennggeerrss uussiinngg LLGGVV’’ss oorr PPCCVV’’ss..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 90

http://www.fta.co.uk/

http://www.rhdtc.co.uk/


Community legislation, which allows those aged over 18 to drive minibuses (not exceeding 16 passenger seats) or buses on routes not exceeding 50 kilometres. Continuous training for professional drivers In Great Britain, continuous training for professional drivers of vehicles of C, C+E, D and D+E categories exists, but is not compulsory.


In Great Britain, a student may learn how to drive with an Approved Driving Instructor (for cars) or with a non-professional supervisor. They may study separately for the theory test. There is no requirement to complete a minimum number of lessons with an instructor or a non-professional supervisor. Most students combine professional instruction with practise using a non-professional supervisor. The student (for a category B licence) must be at least 17 years old and must

• obtain a provisional licence, issued by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency in Swansea, before starting to drive on the road.

The (non-professional) supervisor must: • have held a driving licence in the category for at least 3 years • be at least 21 years old

During the training, the following restrictions must be adhered to:

• prohibition from towing a trailer (except when training for categories B+E, C1+E, C+E, D1+E and D+E)

• prohibition from driving on the motorway (categories A and B only)

The car used by a student training with a non-professional supervisor does not need to be equipped with dual controls. However, all vehicles driven by learners must display ‘L’ plates (‘D’ plate in Wales). Before riding a moped or motorcycle on the road it is necessary to complete compulsory basic training (CBT), with an organisation approved by the Driving Standards Agency (DSA). Training includes a combination of theory, practical on-site training and riding, and practical on-road riding. It normally takes about a day to complete.


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 91



Those obtaining their first full licence (Category A or B) are “on probation” for 2 years. Those who accumulate more than 6 penalty points during this period are returned to learner status, i.e. they lose their driving licence. They must apply for a new provisional licence, are subject to the restrictions applicable to learner drivers and must pass the theory and practical tests again. A voluntary recognized course of post-test training is available (Pass Plus). Specific data on training51 Table 4.7 Age of drivers involved in accidents52 53 Cars 1990 Cars 2000 Age Number Age Number Under 17 1,503 Under 17 518 17-19 32,327 17-19 21,366 20-24 55,975 20-24 38,577 25-28 38,927 25-29 40,461 29-34 45,483 30-34 42,741 35-54 94,355 35-39 36,488 55-64 21,335 40-49 51,742 65 and over 17,745 50-59 35,229 Not reported 22,531 60-69 17,294 70 and over 11,877 Not reported 33,553 All ages 330,181 All ages 329,846

5500 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA 5511 PPeerrcceennttaaggee ooff ddrriivveerrss wwiitthh vvoolluunnttaarryy ttrraaiinniinngg iiss nnoott kknnoowwnn.. 5522 BBeettwweeeenn 11999900 aanndd 22000000 tthhee ppuubblliisshheedd aaggee ccaatteeggoorriieess ffoorr ccaarr ddrriivveerrss cchhaannggeedd.. 5533 DDrriivveerrss ooff HHGGVVss,, LLGGVVss,, bbuusseess aanndd ccooaacchheess iinnvvoollvveedd iinn aacccciiddeennttss aarree nnoott bbrrookkeenn ddoowwnn iinnttoo aaggee

ccaatteeggoorriieess aanndd aarree rreeccoorrddeedd aass oonnee ggrroouupp..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 92


Table 4.8 Other motor vehicle drivers 1990 2000 57,040 49,149

4.2.10 Policy framework Spain


4.2.10.2 Certificate of professional competence

In Spain, the minimum age for obtaining a driving licence category C and C+E is 18 years. Under the age of 21, a certificate for professional competence (CPC) is compulsory for C and C+E categories as well as for D and D+E categories within a restricted area of 50 km. However, the CPC does not exist under the current Spanish legislation. The practical consequence is that the procedure is that C and C+E licences are only issued at the age of 21. If a driver has been working as a driver of heavy lorries (C, C+E) for altogether more than one year, he can obtain the CPC for the transport of persons. The professional training for the CPC is exists, but is not compulsory and is not valid as a CPC. The Dirección General de Tráfico (Jozefa Valcárcel 28, 28027 Madrid) is responsible for conducting the assessment tests and the issuing of the CPC. The certificate of professional competence is also compulsory for the transport of dangerous goods (ADR) (see text below) and taxi drivers. Continuous training In Spain, continuous training for professional drivers of vehicles of C, C+E, D and D+E categories does exist but is not compulsory. There are many organisations who organise continuous training for professional drivers. For the continuous training for the professional transport of goods : CEFTRAL, Plaza Ciudad de Salta, 10, E-28043 Madrid. For the continuous training for the professional transport of persons: ALSA, Edificio ALSA Grupo., Miguel Fleta, 4, E-28037 Madrid. Dangerous goods Driving vehicles for dangerous transports is subject to the obtention of a special authorization, in the cases that the European Agreement of International Dangerous Transports (ADR) or the Spanish Regulation on Dangerous Transports by Road (TPC) require said authorization.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 93


It is forbidden to drive said dangerous transport vehicles without having obtained the corresponding authorization, which the driver will carry together with the corresponding driving license, showing it to the authorities or their agents when requested. The validity of said authorization is conditioned to being used within the period signalled in the authorization, and keeping to the limitations on materials stated on the authorization. Requirements Being holder of at least a B class license at least one year old. Having passed a preparation course for dangerous transport drivers at an educational centre authorized by the "Dirección General de Tráfico". Being declared apt in the corresponding ability controls Being free from any judicial verdict restricting the driver's right to drive motor vehicles or motorcycles, and being the applicant's driving license not withdrawn or intervened. Qualifying for the psycho-physical requirements of a C1 class driving license. Being Spanish resident. Required documents: • Application on official form which can be obtained at the "Jefaturas Provinciales de

Tráfico" and the "Jefaturas Locales de Tráfico". • Photocopy of the valid national identity card, or alternatively, passport, foreign nationals

identification document (NIE) proving Spanish residency or being a student for the required period, together with the original documents, which will be given back after being compared to the copies.

• The required valid driving license, and photocopy. • Certificate of psycho-physical ability when the applicant is not holder of a valid C1 or D1

classes driving license. Said certificate will be issued by an authorized Drivers Checking Centre, in the province where the application is filed.

• Certificate issued by the educational centre where the applicant attended the course on Dangerous Transports, stating that the applicant has passed said course.

• Photocopy of the special authorization held by the applicant, when requesting this authorization to include further dangerous materials.

The main objective of the General Road Directorate is to reduce the number and severity of accidents to the maximum, by acting over the State Road Network. Specific objectives are as follows: • eliminate road sections with high accident rates, respecting the homogeneity of the routes; • provide the possibility of recovering, in case of errant vehicles leaving the roadway and

install safety barriers in order to minimise the consequences of an exit from the road; • remove risky elements; • provide the best visibility conditions;

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 94


• facilitate driving operations and control of the vehicle, especially under adverse weather conditions;

• reach the homogeneity of routes, according to the road network hierarchy, in order to improve users’ road perception.

Ability tests to be passed by driving licence applicants The ability tests that the applicants must pass are the following: I) Psycho-physical ability tests; II) Knowledge control tests. III) Behaviour and aptitude control tests. IV) Ability and behaviour control tests on roads open for normal traffic. Psycho-physical ability tests Applicants will be subjected to the psycho-physical ability tests and required explorations in order to determine whether the applicant is apt. Said tests and explorations will be conducted at the Drivers Checking Centres authorized by Royal Decree 2272/1985, December 4, and complementary statements. Knowledge control tests • Knowledge control tests will be written. In special cases duly justified, an oral test or other

adapted to the special needs of the applicant for A1, A and B class licenses may substitute the written one. The "Jefatura Provincial de Tráfico" will provide the applicants with the required questionnaires for written tests.

• Knowledge control test, common to all licenses: Applicants to all classes of licenses will be subject to it. The questionnaire will be composed of a minimum of 40 questions and a maximum of 90.

• Control test on mechanical knowledge and simple maintenance operations in vehicles: Applicants to C1, C, D1, D license classes will be subject to it, as well as those for school transport, cars for public transport of passengers and priority vehicles. The questionnaire will be composed of a minimum of 32 questions and a maximum of 72.

• Specific knowledge control tests: Applicants to all classes of driving licenses except B and to the different classes of driving permits will be subject to it. The test will be composed of a minimum of 16 questions and a maximum of 42.

• Knowledge control test for driving permit applicants: The questionnaire will be composed of a minimum of 16 questions and a maximum of 32.

The tests will be marked Apt or Non-apt. The Apt mark will have a validity period of six months, counting from the next month to the one when the applicant was declared apt. Those who didn't pass the knowledge control tests will not be allowed in the ability and behaviour test on track, and those who didn't pass the latter will not be allowed in the ability and behaviour test on open road.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 95


There is an exemption from this test for all holders of a driving license, whatever its class, that required passing this test in order to obtain it. Other exemptions: Article 58 of the "Reglamento General de Conductores"54 55. III) Ability and behaviour control tests on track. This test will be designed in order to check the applicants' skill when manoeuvring and using the vehicle's different control systems. 1. Applicants for the A1 and A license classes, will be asked to perform the following manoeuvres: A) Zigzag through markers. B) Driving along curves and reverse curves on a limited space, describing two "8" or a

trefoil. C) Driving along a stripe or sheet of limited width. D) Describe a curve between 90º and 180º at a constant speed. E) Driving along a narrow corridor. F) Emergency controlled speeding and braking. G) Avoiding an obstacle. H) Engine start, speeding up and stopping. Previously to performing said manoeuvres, the applicant will: • Wear the helmet and verifying security equipment. • Release the vehicle from its stand pushing it without engine support, walking at its side

and keeping balance. • Start the engine and get ready for the start of the test. 2. Applicants for B, C1, C, D1 and D class licenses, as well as applicants for school transport driving authorizations, cars for public transport of passengers and priority vehicles using special light or acoustic signal devices, will perform the following manoeuvres: I) In line parking, oblique or perpendicular, on flat ground and limited space, using

forward and reverse gears, and exit from the parking space. J) In line parking, in a limited space on a slope, using forward and reverse gears, and exit

from the parking space. K) Reverse driving on a straight line and on a curve, performing a reverse run keeping a

straight direction and using the circulation road to turn to the left or to the right at a corner.

L) U-turn using forward and reverse gears in a limited space. M) Starting a run without jerks or unintentional reverse run on a slope.

5544 GGeenneerraall RReegguullaattiioonn oonn DDrriivveerrss 5555 SSeeee aannnneexxeedd ttaabbllee

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 96


The applicant will perform at least three out of the five manoeuvres previously described. Among them, those in chapters I) or K) will be compulsory. The required manoeuvres in order to obtain the B class driving license may be performed when testing the applicant's abilities and behaviour on open roads, or in case it is suitable, in a closed track. 3. Applicants for the B+E, C1+E, C+E, D1+E and D+E class driving licenses, will perform, beside the manoeuvres indicated in chapters I), K) and M), the following: N) Trailer coupling and uncoupling using the reverse gear. Ñ) Driving the rear part of the vehicle combination towards a spring. 4. Applicants for the driving license for special self-powered farming vehicles will perform the manoeuvres specified in chapters I), L), M), N) and Ñ). 5. Applicants for special driving licenses subject to restrictions and or for driving vehicles for the disabled, will perform, as far as possible, the manoeuvres required for the A1 and A licenses. Ability and behaviour control tests All applicants for any driving license will safely perform, during this test in normal traffic conditions, the operations and manoeuvres required by article 49, sections 1,2,3 and 4 in the "Reglamento General de Conductores" (General Regulation on Drivers), specially: • checking the good condition of tyres, lights, steering, brakes, blinkers, horn, etc. • making the necessary adjustments in order to get a correct seating position; • adjusting mirrors and seat belt; • checking the doors' locks;

All the control systems in the car will be properly used: • steering wheel, accelerator, clutch, gearshift, brake and parking brake, lights, blinkers,

windscreen wipers and their water system, heating and other controls. • the proper use of the vehicle's controls will be in the following conditions: • starting the engine and a run without jerks, on flat ground or slopes.

Speeding up and shifting gears till reaching an adequate speed, keeping a straight direction, adapting speed to perform turns, controlling the vehicle's trajectory. Performing a U-turn, using forward and reverse gears.

• braking in order to stop accurately. Parking and leaving the parking place using forward and reverse gears.

1. Applicants for the A1 and A classes driving licenses will also be required to know how

to:

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 97


A) Wear and adjust the helmet and verify the rest of safety and protection, usual in motorcycles.

B) Release the motorcycle from its stand, and push it without engine support, walking at its side.

C) Park the motorcycle, setting up its stand. D) Perform U-turns. E) Keep the vehicle's balance at different speeds, at low speed and in different driving

situations, even carrying a passenger. F) Getting inclined in order to turn. 2. Applicants for B+E, C1, C1+E C, C+E D1, D1+E, D and D+E class licenses, will prove

that they are capable of performing the following operations: A) Verifying power-assisted braking and steering. B) Using the different braking systems. C) Using the rest of speed decreasing systems, apart from driving brakes. D) Adapting the trajectory of the vehicle to different curves, considering vehicle

characteristics, length and corbels. E) Perform the coupling and uncoupling to the vehicle of a trailer. F) Using the tachograph. G) Starting a run, shifting gears, and stopping smoothly. 3. Applicants for the A class license will also prove that they can keep balance at different speeds, including low speed, and in different driving situations. 4. Applicants for the D class license will also prove that they can perform the required actions regarding vehicle safety. Requirements Being the holder of a valid ordinary driving license of the corresponding class. Having no disciplinary records at the "Registro Central de Conductores e Infractores"56 or in case of driving license suspension records (administrative sanctions) or driving license withdrawal records (judicial veredict), that these antecedents might be considered cancelled according to article 136.2.2nd of the "Código Penal"57 and article 82 of the "Ley sobre Tráfico, Circulación de Vehículos a Motor y Seguridad Vial"58. Required Documents Application on an official form which can be obtained at the "Jefaturas Provinciales de Tráfico" and the "Jefaturas Locales de Tráfico". 5566 CCeennttrraall RReeggiisstteerr ooff DDrriivveerrss aanndd IInnffrraaccttoorrss 5577 PPeennaall CCooddee 5588 LLaaww oonn TTrraaffffiicc,, MMoottoorr VVeehhiiccllee CCiirrccuullaattiioonn aanndd RRooaadd SSaaffeettyy

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 98



Driving school or under age transport vehicles is subject to a special authorisation enabling for it, beside the corresponding driving license. Said special authorisation will be carried by the driver together with the corresponding ordinary driving license, and will be shown to any authority or its agents when requested. The special authorization will have the same validity period as the upper class driving license held by the driver. The authorization may be prorogued for the same periods as said license by means of a prorogue issued by the "Jefatura Provincial de Tráfico". In Spain, a student has two possibilities to learn how to drive: 1. theory and practical training at a driving school 2. theory and practical training with a non-professional supervisor (category B) In system 1, there are no restrictions for the student. A special blue plate with the letter ‘L’ in white on it must be displayed on the car of the driving school. The car must be equipped with double controls. Candidates are not required to follow a minimum number of practical or theory lessons in either system 1 or system 2. However, a logbook must be kept. In system 2, both the student and the non-professional supervisor must meet some conditions. The student must:

• be at least 18 years old • pass a medical examination (or complete a declaration on the honour) • pass a theory test • always be accompanied by the same supervisor • possess a permit, issued by the ‘Provincial Traffic Delegations’, valid for a maximum of

8 months The non-professional supervisor must:

• have held a category B driving licence for at least 5 years • be in possession of a special permit. • not have had any sanctions taken against him for the last 2 years

There are certain restrictions when training with a non-professional supervisor:

• Prohibition from driving on the highway and on motorways on the eve of bank holidays and on bank holidays

• Prohibition from towing a trailer

5599 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn ppaarrttllyy oobbttaaiinneedd ffrroomm CCIIEECCAA

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 99


• Speed limit of 80 km/h on motorways, instead of 120 km/h • Speed limit of 80 km/h on secondary roads, instead of 90 km/h • Speed limit of 40 km/h inside built-up areas, instead of 50 km/h

A special red plate with the letter ‘L’ in white on it must be displayed on the car to indicate that it is being driven by a student training with a non-professional supervisor. The car must also have double commands.


In Spain, holders of all categories must obey speed limits of 80 km/hour on motorways and secondary roads the first year after they have obtained a driving licence. This period can not be shortened or extended. It is necessary to indicate with an ‘L’ plate (white on green) on the car that the driver of the vehicle has a probational licence.

4.2.11 Policy framework Poland

Poland’s System of Driving Licences In Poland to apply for a driving licence: 1. you must be the minimum driving age for the Category (Category A1, B1 and T – 16 years

of age, Category A, B, B+E, C, C+E, C1 or C1+E – 18 years of age, Category D, D+E, D1 or D1+E – 21 years of age),

2. you must have a medical examination certificate, if required, 3. you must have a psychological examination certificate, if required, 4. you must complete Category specific training, 5. and pass the national Category specific test. Driver training is provided by authorised driving schools. The training programme covers the following components:

• basic training – to be completed before taking the national Category specific test, • additional training – to be taken following failure of the knowledge or skills national

test three times. To begin training:

• you must be the minimum age for the Category (for Category B training can begin earlier at parents’ or carer’s permission),

• you must have a valid medical examination certificate.


R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 100


For driving licence Categories C, C1, D or D1 you must also present your Category B licence or Category B training and national test certificate; for driving licence Categories B+E, C+E, C1+E, D+E or D1+E you must present your driving licence Category B, C, C1, D or D1 or Category B, C, C1, D or D1 training and national test certificate. These requirements do not apply to national service members. The training involves theory and practical classes. The number of knowledge and skills hours for each basic training candidate will be set by the instructor on an individual basis. The law only specifies the minimum requirements. Table 5 gives an overview of the training requirements.

Table 4.9 Minimum theory and practice training hours by the driving licence categories

Category

Knowledge

Skills

A, A1

10

10

B1, B+E

10

15

B

10

20

C1

20

15

C, C1+E, D1+E

20

20

C+E, D+E

20

25

D1

20

30

D

20

40 That covers basic training. Additional training is required when you have failed the test three times:

• in the case of the theory test, the number of hours may not be less than that in basic theory training for the Category,

• in the case of the practical test – 5 hours of practical training. These requirements apply to all driving licence candidates. Commercial Drivers Certificates Drivers of motor vehicles designed to carry more than 5 occupants including the driver, drivers of Large Goods Vehicles or a combination of vehicles up to 7.5 tons used for commercial

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 101


carriage of people or goods and drivers carrying hazardous materials and tram drivers are required to obtain a professional certificate. To qualify, you must:

• be 21, • present an additional training course pass certificate, • present a medical examination certificate, • present a psychological examination certificate.

The table below gives an overview of additional training courses. Table 4.10 Additional training syllabus and number of hours.

Number of hours of training

Item

Name of subject

Knowledge

Basic / additional training

Skills

1

Rational driving

8 / 2

Vehicle manoeuvres – 35 min Loading - 4 hours Vehicle occupant safety and comfort – 4 hours

2

Rules and regulations

10 / 3

3

Services

6 / 1

4

Test

20 min.

5

Total

24 / 6 hours 20 min

8 hours 35 min

Additional training is available through regional road traffic agencies. The practical part begins after the theory part. The course ends in a national test, made up of a theory and practical test. The theory test covers road traffic regulations, driving techniques, vehicle servicing and paramedic skills. The driver will be asked 3 questions on each syllabus subject and the test is considered passed with at least two correct answers. The national test is taken at a regional road traffic agency.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 102


Graduates of additional training courses are expected to have a good working knowledge of the following:

• the design and operation of the vehicle’s basic mechanisms affecting the safety of driving,

• rules of safe and economical driving, • how to act following a road accident or in another emergency, • transport and administrative procedures applicable to the carriage of goods and people, • national regulations on the carriage of people and goods, drivers’ hours, • documents required in the country and abroad when carrying people or goods, • loading and unloading procedures, types of packaging and ways to secure loads.

Those graduating from the course are also expected to be familiar with basic vehicle checks before driving off, tachograph operation and professional vehicle manoeuvres. The qualifying certificate is good for the duration of the medical and psychological examinations validity. You have to take a medical before the first qualifying certificate and renew it as follows: • for holders of Category A, B, B+E, B1 or T – up to 55 years of age – every 5 years and

every year when aged 55 and more • for holders of Category C, C+E, C1, C1+E, D, D+E, D1 or D1+E - up to 55 years of age –

every 3 years and every year when aged 55 and more. Psychological testing is conducted before you are issued the first qualifying certificate and then within a year from turning 55. What Happens Once You Are Licensed? Since 1993 Poland has had the demerit point system. Under the system offenders will be issued a ticket and receive a specific number of points. The number of points ranges between 1 and 10 and depends on the severity of the offence. All points are recorded in a police run driving offenders register. Once recorded, the points will be deleted a year after the offence, unless the driver receives the maximum number of demerit points. The main reason for introducing the demerit point system in Poland was to encourage more disciplined driving and better road traffic regulations compliance. It was meant as a way to achieving higher levels of road safety. There are two different demerit point limits in Poland. New drivers in their first year are allowed to collect the maximum of 20 points. Once reached, the driver has their driving licence cancelled and must apply for a new one. The limit for other drivers is 24 points. Once reached, the driver must take an exam. It consists of the theory and practical part.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 103


Having collected a certain number of points, the driver may voluntarily and at his own cost sign up for a course. On completion of the course, 6 points will be taken away from the driver’s record. Under the current regulations in Poland, drivers can sign up for such courses the maximum of once every six months. These rules do not apply to new drivers in their first year. Table 4.11 gives an overview of the basic frequent offender training programme. Table 4.11 Poland’s frequent offender training programme

Item

Subject

Time

Method

Means of teaching

Trainer

1.

Causes of road accidents and the level of road safety in Poland

2 x 45 min.

Talk

Video tape

Road traffic

police officer

2.

Legal and social consequence of road accidents

45 min.

Talk

Video tape

Road traffic police officer

3.

Psychological aspects of driver behaviour

3 x 45 min.

Talk

Video tape

Psychologist

The idea is to make drivers aware of the consequences of road traffic violations, in particular as it relates to safe behaviour in traffic. Voluntary courses for traffic offenders are organised by regional road traffic agencies. Outline of How Selected Driving Licence and Driver Training Regulations Were Amended Table 4.12 shows the driver training history milestones. Emphasis is placed on commercial drivers’ issues. In the case of Category B applicants, the only change in recent years has been in the training syllabus and the minimum age which was raised from 17 to 18. That change took effect on June 1, 2002.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 104


Table 4.12 History of road traffic regulations changes in the area of Category C and D driving licences and driver training.

Laws

Major changes

Road Traffic Act of February 1, 1983 • Minister of Transport

Regulation dated October 13, 1983 concerning motor vehicle drivers

1. Driving licence requirements: • minimum age (C – 18, D – 21) • physical and mental fitness • completion of required training • proof of necessary qualifications • test pass certificate

2. Types of training (introduced for the first time): • basic driving course for the particular categories • additional course for those familiar with motorisation in the broad sense

(e.g. engineers, road traffic police officers, driving instructors and examiners) or who have held a lower category driving licence for a specific duration. The course only covered practical training.

3. Category C requirements: • completion of basic driving course or graduation from a state school

that teaches drivers among other subjects or • you must be a holder of Category B or T driving licence, have 2 years

of non-professional experience or 1 year of professional experience and complete an additional training course or

• you must be a holder of Category D driving licence and have at least 1 year driving experience.

4. Category D requirements: • completion of basic driving course or • you must be a holder of Category C driving licence, have at least 3

years of non-professional experience or 1 year of professional driving experience with vehicles of more than 3.5 tons and complete an additional training course or

• you must be a holder of Category B driving licence, have at least 5 years of professional driving experience and complete an additional training course or

• you must be a holder of a trolleybus driving licence, have at least a year’s trolleybus driving experience and complete an additional training course.

5. Introduction of medical and psychological certificates for commercial

drivers

Amended Road Traffic Act, July 27, 1991

6. Driving licence requirements: • minimum age (C – 18, D – 21)

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 105


• Minister of Transport Regulation dated March 10, 1992 concerning driving licences

• physical and mental fitness • completion of required training • proof of necessary qualifications • test pass certificate

7. Types of training (extended catalogue of types of training): • basic driving course for the particular categories • additional training course for holders of lower category driving licences

for a specific period. Next to practical training , mandatory theory classes were introduced

• learning to drive for those who have completed theory training elsewhere and passed the theory test. Covered practical training only

• courses in a state school. Did not apply to category D applicants. 8. Category C requirements: • completion of basic training or state school whose curriculum includes

driver training (140 hours of theory and 40 hours of practice) or • you must have held Category B driving licence for 2 years or Category D

for 1 year and competed additional training course (72 hours of theory and 20 hours of practical training) or

• you must have held Category B driving licence for 2 years or Category D for 1 year and passed the theory test (20 hours of practical training).

9. Category D requirements: • completion of basic training (250 hours of theory and 150 hours of

practical training) or • you must hold Category C driving licence and have at least 3 years of

experience or Category B driving licence and have 5 years of experience or trolleybus driving licence and have one year of experience and complete an additional training course (92 hours of theory and 40 hours of practical training) or

• you must hold Category C driving licence and have at least 3 years of experience or Category B driving licence and have 5 years of experience or trolleybus driving licence and have 1 year of experience and complete a driving course (40 hours)

Road Traffic Act June 20, 1997 – Road Traffic Law • Minister of Transport

Regulation dated June 15, 1999 amending a regulation on driver training, driving licence examinations and driver licensing

Driving licence requirements: minimum age (B+E, C, C+E, C1, C1+E - 18, D, D+E, D1+E – 21) medical examination certificate completion of required training national test pass certificate 1. Types of training (new types of training - in effect since 1 July 1998) • basic training – before first time driving licence examination • additional training course – every time after failing three times the

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 106


• Minister of Transport Regulation dated June 13, 2001 concerning driver training, driving licence examinations and driver licensing

theory or practical examination 2. Driving licence categories requirements (in effect since July 1, 1999): • C, C1, D or D1 – you must be a holder of category B driving licence

(since January 1, 2002 replaced with the requirement to complete equivalent training and passing category B tests),

• B+E, C+E, C1+E, D+E or D1+E – you must be a holder of category B, C, C1, D or D1 driving licence

You can apply for the above driving licence categories and not hold Category B driving licence, provided the practical training will increase 100 %. The syllabus and number of practical training hours is consistent with the information given earlier. The difference lies in the number of theory training hours which was reduced to 10 hours in each category.

• Minister of Transport Regulation dated May 18, 1998 concerning driver training, driving tests and driving licences, instructor and examiner licensing

More theory training hours are added. The current syllabus and duration of basic training is given earlier in the paper.

• Minister of Infrastructure Regulation dated December 14, 2001 concerning additional training courses for commercial drivers

Introduction of qualifying certificates. The rules are still in effect and are described under section 3 Commercial Drivers Certificates.

Analysis of the above data shows that in 1997 Poland introduced less stringent requirements with regard to commercial truck and bus drivers. They no longer have to have previous driving experience. There was a reduction in the mandatory theory and practical training hours. Bus and truck drivers are not required to take periodical training. They only need to take a single additional training course to qualify. Drivers carrying hazardous materials are an exception and have to take special training every 5 years. This is a requirement under the European Agreement on international road haulage of hazardous materials that Poland ratified (1975). In terms of technical requirements, Poland is successively introducing UN EKG regulations into its legislation. Since 1981 Poland has adopted 85 regulations with 10 more pending signature. Table 4.13 Schedule of UN ECE regulation implementation in Poland

(Source: MTI, 2002)

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 107


Year Number of UN ECE Regulation year Number of UN ECE Regulation

1990

84,

1996

68, 86, 102,

1991

1997

18, 25, 39, 66, 78,

1992

89,

1998

3, 5, 21, 27, 31, 46, 81, 85, 108, 109,

1993

1999

9, 10, 29, 33, 51, 63, 79,

1994

59, 93,

2000

4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 17, 19, 22, 23, 26, 28, 30, 38, 41, 43, 44, 48, 80, 87, 90, 91, 103, 104, 106,

1995

2001

1, 8, 14, 16, 20, 24, 37, 50, 53, 54, 55, 67, 69, 70, 74, 75, 83, 97, 101,

Pending signature

36, 52, 65, 94, 95, 96, 105, 110, 112, 113

Overview of the Government’s Road Safety Policy For many years Poland’s road safety efforts had been more of a spontaneous activity, usually on a one-off basis and no effectiveness checks. Things took a different turn in 1992 following a World Bank mission to Poland. World Bank specialists analysed Poland’s road safety and identified, among other things, prevention problems. Two years later work on Poland’s road safety programme began following Western Europe criteria. Completed two years later, the programme was called GAMBIT and received approval from European Union experts. Despite that, it never took off the ground for the next four years. In the meantime several regional programmes were developed (Gdansk, Elbląg, Suwalki, Katowice and Warsaw GAMBIT). A change occurred in 2000 with the Transport Minister commissioning an updated programme. In May 2001 the Government of Poland adopted the updated road safety programme GAMBIT 2000 as governmental programme. There is no doubt that a key success of the Programme’s authors was getting the government to commit to numerical road safety targets. The Programme assumes a reduction over the next three years by 2003 in road accident fatalities to 5500 (short-term target), and after 7 years by 2010 – to 4000 (long-term target). What this means is that over the next decade the government of Poland wants to achieve a 36 % reduction in fatalities61.

6611 TThhee ppooiinntt ooff rreeffeerreennccee iiss tthhee yyeeaarr 22000000 aanndd 66229944 ffaattaalliittiieess..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 108


The target can only be achieved when accompanied by prevention efforts and focus on the major risks. GAMBIT 2000 main focus is on reducing the number of casualties in accidents involving: • excessive speed, • vulnerable road users (pedestrians, children, the elderly, bicyclists, people with disabilities), • young drivers, • drunk road users, • roads passing through small towns, • road accident concentration sites. A reduction in the severity of road accidents will be an area of primary focus. As was intended by the authors, the programme should be seen mainly as a road safety policy of government administration. It does assume, however, that government administration will have “a direct or indirect impact on road user behaviour and road safety management at the level of regions, counties (poviats) and municipalities (gminas)”. By adhering to the Programme, regional and local governments should be able to pursue an effective road safety policy. Poland’s road safety prevention efforts are co-ordinated by the Road Safety Council. Established in 1993, its main responsibility is for road safety policies and schemes and the development and implementation of a national road safety programme. The members of the Council include representatives of ministries and central agencies, voluntary organisations and invited experts. At the regional level there are regional road safety councils. While the national and regional road safety councils helped promote road safety issues, the programmes and schemes were insufficient and did not yield a reduction in road accident casualties. In 1999 Poland introduced the administrative reform leading to increased devolution and empowerment of regional governments (e.g. road management, road traffic management, spatial planning or municipality and urban land use plans). Under the new regulations local governments became strong partners in road safety prevention. At present, work is under way in many parts of the country on regional road safety programmes and training the people to take up these schemes. Government and Corporate Policies on Road Transport Safety The current state policy on road transport safety is defined in strategic programmes: 1. State Transport Policy for 2000-2015 on Sustainable Development (November 1999) 2. National Transport Strategy for 2000 – 2006 (January 2000) 3. State Transport Policy for 2001-2015 on Sustainable Development (October 2001) and in the legislation and secondary legislation issued by the ministries; the key legal acts include: 1. Road Traffic Act and its secondary legislation, 2. Road Transport Act and its secondary legislation,

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 109


3. Drivers’ Hours Act, as well as by the economic reality of transport operators. Strategic programmes set out action that will transform road transport and bring it to market economy and European economic co-operation standards. All new papers take into consideration the changes Poland has gone through and its membership in the OECD and NATO. The key objective of the state is to: ”achieve a sustainable transport system in technical, spatial, economic, social and environmental terms as a developing European economy, with due consideration to international co-operation mainly on a European scale and the needs of state defence”. The documents also state that a sustainable transport system (according to the OECD definition): • does not pose a risk to health or the environment, • meets the needs of people and goods movement, • limits emissions and waste to a level that can be absorbed by the environment, uses

resources allowing their renewal, minimises use of new land and noise emission. From the road safety perspective, the key is that the design of Poland’s transport systems must ensure the elimination of risk and guarantee the highest possible level of safety. More details about how this goal should be realised are given in the “Transport Policy for 2001 – 2015”. It recognises Poland’s road safety situation as a factor that diminishes the country’s potential for growth. According to the authors, road safety must be a priority of the transport policy at each level of road and traffic management with public administration taking responsibility for prevention work. With a view to that, the paper defines one of the detailed objectives of the state transport policy for 2001-2015 as:

• improvement of road safety including a reduction in the number of victims and loss incurred by road infrastructure and vehicles, and in particular, achieving European Union road safety levels.

It is a very ambitious goal, especially when you consider the gap between Poland and other European Union countries. The Transport Policy adopts the following detailed road safety objectives: • reduction in the number and severity of accidents by pre-defined values over a specific

period, • to increase the public’s sensitivity to road safety issues. The Policy authors claim the goal is achievable, if Poland can successfully: • introduce the necessary legal changes, including the Road Traffic Law, • expand the operations of Road Safety Councils (at central and regional level),

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 110


• implement the Road Safety Programme GAMBIT 2000, the idea being that GAMBIT will be “enlarged to provide a single platform for public services and their social partners”.

The description suggests that the Transport Policy closely follows the National Road Safety Programme GAMBIT 2000. The other documents use road safety as a mere headline. What all these papers lack is a direct reference to commercial road transport. A reflection of the state’s view on road safety can be seen in the regulations on various aspects of commercial transport of goods and people in the Road Traffic Act and Road Transport Act. Under the Road Traffic Act commercial drivers are required to hold a qualifying certificate and meet specific conditions upon applying for a truck and bus driving licence. These regulations are discussed in the driving licence section. Access to the profession and the market of transport operators is defined in the Road Transport Act which also provides for the establishment of a specialised road transport enforcement agency – the Road Transport Inspectorate. Under the Act, a company whose business is commercial transport of people and goods is required to hold three types of documents. These are: • licence, a document that allows a company to start and run a road transport business, • permit, a document that allows an operator to carry people in national and international

transport, shuttle service and occasional international road transport, • professional qualifying certificate, a document to confirm the holder’s qualifications and

knowledge necessary to take up road transport as a business. Under the regulations, at least one of the company’s officers must hold the certificate.

Road safety gets most recognition in how professional qualifying certificates can be applied for. To pass the qualifying exam the individual must have a good working knowledge of: • road traffic regulations, including road safety issues, • vehicle certification and technical tests regulations, the required maintenance, • regulations on commercial drivers qualifications, • legal drivers’ hours regulations (including the use of tachographs in commercial vehicles). The Road Transport Act provides for the establishment of a new inspection agency – the Road Transport Inspectorate, and its scope of responsibilities. It will have responsibility for checking compliance with road traffic regulations, mandatory vehicle driving limits and breaks and driver rest periods. Currently, work is underway on implementing the Act and the first inspectors are beginning work in the field. All these regulations have only been in place for the last few years and it is difficult to asses their impact on road transport safety. In previous years, before the recent legislation took effect, the state’s road safety requirements of transport operators applying for goods and passenger licenses were not very stringent. The company was required to hire drivers with qualifying certificates, the fleet had to have valid technical tests and the operator had to plan the drivers’

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 111


hours to ensure that they complied with the binding regulations. Neglect of road safety principles was no cause for revoking an operator’s license. While the regulations did say that a license may be revoked if the operator “glaringly violated the license terms and conditions or other legal regulations applicable to the business”, but in reality excessive drivers’ hours were never even considered as the basis for revoking a licence. The Problem of Polish Commercial Drivers’ Hours In the nineties commercial drivers’ hours were subject to the Labour Code, like all other professions. Under the Code drivers’ working time could not be more than 8 hours daily and 42 hours weekly computed over a period of 3 months. In justified cases motor transport working hours could be as many as 10 daily but weekly hours could not exceed 42 hours. Working time covers the employee’s availability to take up work with no distinction made for periods of driving or rest. When driving outside Poland, Polish drivers were subject to European drivers’ hours rules. Drivers’ hours regulations were not amended until last year. In August 2001 Parliament passed the Drivers’ Hours Act. The Act covers a lot of the AETR62 Agreement provisions and is the first law to specify: • driving limits, mandatory rest periods and guaranteed rest periods • drivers’ hours limits, • employers’ responsibilities for how transport is carried out. The Act will take effect on January 1, 2003 and is expected to help regulate drivers’ hours problems. The data suggest that road transport safety has not been on top of Poland’s agenda. What little consideration was given to the issue (drivers’ hours regulations) in recent years was merely a side effect of having to meet European Union requirements rather than a real interest in reducing road traffic risk. Ineffective enforcement, in particular of drivers’ hours regulations, was another setback to state policy. Undermining these and other road safety regulations has had very serious consequences. The relatively high percentage of commercial drivers (in particular truck drivers) involved in road accidents in the country and the recent crashes of Polish coaches driving in other European countries are a sad reminder of the consequences. In response to the recent events, the government announced its plans to introduce: • thorough on-site checks of transport operators, with focus on drivers’ hours, driver

qualifications and whether the work they do is covered by the licenses they hold. Operators found to glaringly violate the regulations, will have their concessions revoked;

• intensified checks of vehicle technical tests engaging in international passenger transport and the validity of licenses for international passenger transport;

62 Poland ratified the agreement in 1992 but it took 7 years before it was published.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 112


• more stringent examinations on drivers’ hours and rest periods and road safety for managers of transport companies applying for professional qualifying certificates.

There are also plans to: • introduce more stringent commercial driver requirements by increasing the differentiation

and frequency of psychological testing. Currently, drivers are tested twice: prior to employment and when they are 55; there are plans to introduce mandatory psychological testing before entering the profession and then every 5 years until 55 years of age, every 3 years between the age of 56 and 65 and annually for drivers 65 and more;

• introduce regular medical and psychological testing of drivers working for entrepreneurs who engage in non-commercial road haulage (for own needs), who until now have not been subject to such testing,

• introduce mandatory additional training courses for drivers carrying goods – it will apply to drivers of motor vehicles of more than 3.5 tons of maximum permissible weight unlike the current regulation of more than 7.5 tons (proposal falls in line with EU planned regulations),

• introduce pecuniary penalties for entrepreneurs who will hire drivers that do not hold the necessary qualifications, keep a wrong or false driver documentation, do not have their drivers take medical or psychological testing as required by law, hire drivers illegally.

Finally, as a special measure, the Drivers’ Hours Act will be amended to allow it to take effect earlier than originally planned (October 2002). While all these decisions are the right thing to do, one cannot help but say that they should have been made much earlier rather than be spurred by the tragedies. Transport operators take no interest in road safety, either. To a large extent, the economy is the reason why. Estimates show that as many as 100,000 different businesses hold transport licences. Of this number about 60-70,000 actually render transport services, including some 11,000 in international transport. 90 % of Poland’s transport businesses are self-employed people with one or two vehicles, usually in poor condition. Poland only has some 38 companies that operate 50-100 vehicles and 10 that own more than 100 vehicles. Apart from licensed transport companies, there is an unknown number of illegal operators who do not hold the required licenses. All this means that the existing transport businesses outnumber the actual needs. The result, in particular during the present economic downturn and reduced demand for transport, is fierce competition and cost cutting measures which include road safety expenditure cuts and violation of drivers’ hours. It is probably safe to say that it is quite common. Road safety is seen as a costly and unnecessary expenditure making the company less competitive. Poland has no mechanisms to encourage companies to take interest in road safety. In theory drivers themselves can influence the level of road safety. Under the regulations, in Poland drivers may refuse to do a job and even have their case heard by the Labour Court if they think the job puts their or other people’s safety at risk. In practice, however, drivers never do that because with a 17% unemployment rate, by questioning the authority of their employers, they risk losing their job or in the best case scenario make less money.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 113


Outline of How Selected Road Transport Safety Regulations Were Introduced The table below gives a chronological overview of the main legal regulations on road transport safety in the broad sense. Table 4.14 Schedule of road transport safety laws implementation. Laws

Major changes

International Transport Act dated July 26, 1991

introduction of concessions for commercial international road transport operators To obtain the concession, the operator must be able to prove: three years of national road transport experience or a year’s international road transport experience The concession may be revoked if the holder “fails to observe the terms and conditions defined in international road haulage agreements signed by the Republic of Poland”. Act no longer in effect.

Minister of Transport and Maritime Economy Regulation dated December 30, 1993 amending the regulation on motor vehicle technical condition and tests

vehicles must be equipped with devices that automatically record the driving and break periods. The regulation applied to vehicles of 9 tons of maximum permissible weight whose first registration was after December 31, 1984 except urban transport buses and Armed Forces vehicles. The regulation took effect on January 1, 1994.

Government Statement dated March 30, 1995 concerning Annexes A and B to the European Agreement concerning international road transport of hazardous materials (ADR)

Poland signed the agreement in 1975 to ratify it in 1992. It introduced the following: the requirement to hire a hazardous materials expert who has completed the necessary training and passed the exam. vehicles registered after June 30, 1993 must have ABS, and vehicles registered after January 1, 1988 must have speed limiters (for international transport) Poland made speed limiters mandatory on January 1, 2002.

Minister of Transport Regulation dated February 3, 1997 concerning additional courses for drivers carrying hazardous matter

Introduction of the following courses: basic course on carriage of hazardous materials of various classes (24 hours) specialist course on transport in cisterns (16 hours) specialist course on carrying explosives class 1 (8 hours) specialist course on carrying radioactive materials Class 7 (8 hours) The objective of the training was to familiarise drivers with the risks and ways to minimise the risk of accidents and how to reduce the effects of an accident. The subjects were the following:

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 114


general requirements of hazardous materials haulage types of risks and ways to reduce them, environmental protection issues when carrying hazardous waste what drivers should do when an accident occurs, in particular first aid, securing the scene of the accident, use of personal protection and devices carried in the vehicle. The basic course and specialist courses can be offered as basic and additional training courses. Drivers must retake training every 5 years.

Road Traffic Act dated June 30, 1997 (recent amendments 6.09.2001)

commercial drivers requirements, including medical and psychological examinations.

International Road Transport Act dated August 2, 1997 concerning the requirements for international road haulage

No longer in effect

Passenger Transport Act dated August 29, 1997 concerning domestic passenger transport

No longer in effect

Poland ratifies the European Agreement providing for road haulage crews’ hours (AETR) 1999

Minister of Transport Regulation dated April 1, 1999 concerning vehicle technical condition and equipment

vehicles of more than 3.5 tons of maximum permissible weight manufactured after December 31, 1999 must have tachographs.

Drivers’ Hours Act August 24, 2001 concerning drivers’ hours

Poland adopts AETR regulations. The Act will take effect on January 1, 2003 but after the recent series of bus accidents, it may be sped up and take effect in October 2002.

Road Transport Act dated September 6, 2001 concerning road transport Minister of Infrastructure Regulation dated January 9, 2002 concerning professional qualifying certificates for road transport Minister of Infrastructure Regulation concerning additional training courses for commercial drivers dated December 14, 2001

introduction of professional qualifying certificates introduction of high penalties for exceeding vehicle maximum parameters appointment of the Road Transport Inspectorate and giving it extensive powers.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 115


4.3 Analysis of the policy

4.3.1 Introduction

Now the input is defined and described it is possible to proceed to the next step in this pilot. To make comparison of current performance data possible it is necessary to sort and compile the data. In other words make the data comparable (standardize) and identify gaps. Next it is important to identify operational best practices and enablers: what are some participants doing that others are not doing and how do they do it? This will be followed by the formulating and implementation of a strategy and finally the development of a implementation plan.

4.3.2 Comparison of current data

Sort and compile date make the performance data comparable (standardise); identify gaps. After completion of data collection, data usually are compiled in form of a matrix. It is important to have available reasonable units of measurement to be able to make data from different countries comparable. By comparing one’s own performance against that of benchmarking partners. The so-called performance gap is identified. In theory this sounds quite simple. In practise it is a little bit more complicated. Besides “normal” quantitative data we also have to benchmark policy, which is less tangible. To do this there are several options: 1. Use the statistical data concerning the amount of dead and casualties as a basis and

discover how policy is handling this: 1. The data from the Irtad database is used to describe the present situation on traffic

safety in a country. Possible indicators for this could be the amount of casualties per one billion vehicle kilometres. Next step is to look in further detail to the policy: by what means is the situation expected to improve? In the case of the professional driver pilot the there will be a focus on the policy concerning driver training in the participating countries. The idea is to group the countries who are having a similar policy towards professional driver training. Given a specific situation in a country (described by the statistical data) the policy of one group could be found more appropriate than an other.

2. Instead of grouping the countries with a similar policy together there is also a possibility to look at a policy on a individual basis. One countries could be identified as a standard or norm (best in practice/ worst in practice / most advanced etc.) based on the present situation described by the number of casualties.

2. Use the policy as a basis and use the statistical data to evaluate the effect of the policy over the past years:

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 116


3. The data from the IRTAD database is used to describe the present situation on traffic safety in a country. Possible indicators for this could be the amount of casualties per one billion vehicle. Next step is to look in further detail to the policy of the past: by what policy is the situation described caused? In the case of the professional driver pilot the there will be a focus on the policy concerning driver training in the participating countries. The policy group, which resulted in the lowest amount of casualties, is presented as best in practice and can be used by other countries as an example.

4. Instead of grouping the countries with a similar policy together there is also a possibility to look at a policy on a individual basis. One countries could be identified as a standard or norm (best in practice/ worst in practice / most advanced etc.) based on the present situation described by the number of casualties.

The problem with strategy 3 and 4 is that it will be very difficult to prove that the effect in the number of casualties was entirely caused by a policy or a part of a policy. For example medical experts could tell us that the improvement of the medical standards led to a decrease in the number of deaths in traffic. Further more this strategy is focussed more on evaluating policies of the past instead of looking towards the future. To be able to cope with the problems mentioned above, it is necessary to classify countries on base of (main) characteristics of the road safety policy. The following categories will be distinguished: Category 1: Purely retrospective Road safety policy is nearly entirely focussed on solving of problems that already have caused incidents. An example is a reconstruction of a road crossing on which already a lot of accidents have occurred. Category 2: Mainly retrospective; partly prospective Although the main focus of the road safety policy still is retrospective (“curing” existing problems), some attention is paid to anticipating future problems. An example is: road construction from the point of view of the (future) road users. Category 3: Mainly prospective, partly retrospective Only a minor part of the road safety policy is concerned with solving problems that already have occurred, the main focus lays on prevention of incidents. This prevention may show as elaborate training programs to (future) road users or as optimal road construction. Still a part of the policy is retrospective, this may show in the ticketing policy. Category 4: Nearly entirely prospective The last category consists of nearly entirely prospective policies; retrospective policies (are felt to be) not necessary. Road safety is characterised by an overall “vision” with elements as

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 117


optimal road construction, optimal driver behaviour, etc. The main focus is to prevent (to “nihilize”) dangerous situations that may cause road incidents. To be able to classify the countries, a short qualitative “road safety policy” highlight description per country is made. Remark:

Each country receives a certain score, which is based on the share of prospective elements in the road safety policy.

France: Mainly retrospective: - Stronger applying the traffic legislation and rules, - Strict control of labour legislation (regulation of driving time), the use of information of

the (future) digital tachograph, - Obligations towards behaviour of drivers such seat belt use and speed control. Mainly prospective: - Set up of continuous education programs for road users of all ages, - Development of a safety culture in business in general and in road traffic in particular, - Institutional strengthening and modification, - Re-examination of the infra-structures, - Upgrading communication; “improved understanding of underlying reasoning behind

the traffic rules so rules will be better respected”, - Penalty Point system. Overall conclusion: Category two tending to category three Denmark: Mainly retrospective: - Safer roads: “curing” dangerous roads by learning from accidents that already have

occurred, Mainly prospective: - Safer roads: setting up and the maintaining of a “road standards work” with the

optimum design of individual road elements, - Design of methods and instructions to be used in traffic areas as to improve road safety

as well as to improve (urban) environment, - Development of a “Master Plan” with the following main areas: - Reduction of average traffic speed, - Limiting of drunken driving, - Better safeguarding of cyclist, - Reduction of accidents in intersections.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 118


Overall conclusion: Category three Germany: Mainly retrospective: - Imposing further bans on overtaking (vehicle over 7.5 tonnes GVW), - Ensuring that the minimum distance between vehicles is kept, - Carrying out more checks on legislation, - Speedily transposing Directive 2000/30/EC in German Law, - Learning from mistakes. Mainly prospective: - Improving of the range of training courses for drivers, - Development of a dedicated Program that aids transportation companies with

implementing road safety measures. Overall conclusion: Category two

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 119


Sweden: Mainly retrospective: - Analyse accidents that have resulted in death or serious injury in traffic and, where

feasible, initiate suitable measures so as to avoid the repetition of such accidents. Mainly prospective: - Create a road environment that minimises the risk of road users making mistakes and

that prevents serious human injury when designing, operating and maintaining the state road network,

- Set an example in our own operations through the quality assurance (from a road safety perspective) of journeys and transports in all areas of activity, both those undertaken in-house and those contracted,

- Stimulate all players within the road transport system to work resolutely towards achieving mutually targeted objectives,

- Conduct the work on road safety in close co-operation with all players within the road transport system

- Take advantage of and further develop the commitment of the general public to safer traffic.

Overall conclusion: Category four The Netherlands: Mainly retrospective: - More strict control on the road traffic legislation, - “Automatic” ticketing systems, like the WIM-VID system, and trajectory control, - (still) A strong concentration on the more traditional policy instruments like legislation. Mainly prospective: - Starting up of the discussion on road safety responsibilities and the sharing of it between

the private and the public sector. - The Pizza model concept with respect to responsibility for road safety. Overall conclusion: Category three Austria: Mainly retrospective: - Legalistic actions on (bad) road driving behaviour. Mainly prospective: - Development of an (safety) optimised road infra structure, - Stimulation of a more environmental friendly modal split, resulting in less road traffic

and thus less road traffic casualties, - Legal measures to increase the public awareness of road safety, - Information campaigns to influence driving behaviour.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 120


Overall conclusion: Category four Ireland: Remark: The Irish economy showed a phenomenal growth in recent years as result of her competitiveness. A negative side effect of such a growth is that already existing significant deficiencies in the quality and availability of the infrastructure are highlighted. Mainly retrospective: - More precautionary regulations in relation to seat belts, speed limits and other key factors

designed to influence road user behaviour, - Better enforcement, road engineering and public awareness, - Improved safety design in road vehicles. Mainly prospective: - Commitment on the introduction of a penalty point system. Overall conclusion: Category one United Kingdom: Mainly retrospective: - Elimination of road sections with high accident rates, respecting the homogeneity of the

routes. Mainly prospective: - As UK road casualty statistics show a relatively high accident rate of children, additional

(training) action is taken concerning this group of road users. - In driver training special emphasis is laid on driver behavioural aspects of road safety

(creating road safety awareness). - Creating awareness of the relation between (the causes of) low alertness and traffic

accidents. - Road users tend to underestimate the effect of speed on accidents. Special attention is

paid to the creation of speed awareness. - Special attention is laid on the stimulation and improvement of safety of slow traffic

(going on foot, bicycling). Overall conclusion: Category four Spain: Mainly retrospective: - Eliminate road sections with high accident rates, respecting the homogeneity of the

routes;

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 121


Mainly prospective: - Provide the possibility of recovering, in case of errant vehicles leaving the roadway and

install safety barriers in order to minimise the consequences of an exit from the road. - Remove risky elements in the infrastructure. - Provide the best visibility conditions. - Facilitate driving operations and control of the vehicle, especially under adverse

weather conditions - Reach the homogeneity of routes, according to the road network hierarchy, in order to

improve users’ road perception. - Special driver’s ability tests. Overall conclusion: Category three Poland: Poland inherited from her recent past her very poor road safety statistics. To change this for the better the Polish Government adopted the so-called Gambit 2000 programme. One of the central targets is to reduce the number of road traffic fatalities by nearly 40% in the next 10 years. Mainly retrospective: - Strict (police) control on: - Excessive speed, - (Behaviour of) young drivers, - Drunken road users, - Roads passing through small towns, - Road accident concentration sites. Mainly prospective: - Special attention (in the form of Safety Programs) for vulnerable road users

(pedestrians, children, the elderly, bicyclists, people with disabilities), Overall conclusion: Category one Remark:

The information about road safety characteristics of the following countries: Portugal, Belgium and Finland, are derived from the report:

”Spieken mag, maar wat is het beste antwoord”; NEA 2002 (Dutch only). Remark:

The information obtained from the Czech Republic was on the point of road safety policy insufficient to be used as base for the classification into the four categories mentioned.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 122


The four categories and the summarised characteristics of the road safety policy per countries are used to classify the countries that are monitored. The classification will be used in chapter six. The results are shown in figure 4.1. Figure 4.1 Classification of road safety policies.

(Scale: 0-100%)

Entirely Prospective

0

100

0 100

Sweden

Portugal

Cat. 4

Poland

Ireland

Belgium

Germany

France

The Netherlands

Spain

Denmark

United Kingdom

Finland

Cat. 1 Cat.2 Cat. 3

Entirely Retrospective

Note:

Four “policy-clusters” can be distinguished. These clusters correspond (more or less) with the classification into the policy categories “retrospective” and “prospective”.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 123


5 ROAD SAFETY CULTURE

5.1 Introduction

Safety culture of transport companies is a complex issue, as stated in the introduction. This makes it difficult to benchmark. Nevertheless, the topic is highly relevant for a sound road safety policy focussed on the professional transport sector. It concerns the relationship between the government and the road transport sector. This chapter clarifies the concept of safety culture63.

5.1.1 Safety culture

The safety culture of a transport company relates to all aspects of the company. In short, the following three aspects are the main components of a safety culture: • Quality of vehicles • Quality of drivers • Quality of the organisation Quality of vehicles affects the safety of transport. The following issues influence the safety level of the vehicle: • Passive safety equipment (airbags etc.) • Active safety equipment (ABS, visibility around, etc.) • Maintenance • Driver-machine interface (navigation system, voice dialling, etc.) • Good stowage equipment • Importance of safety aspects in the buying process Mainly, this group of measures consist of technical related modifications of the vehicle. Some of the technical related modifications and their effects are: • Blind spot mirrors, which increases the visibility for the driver and reduces the number of

accidents involving the right front corner of the truck. Especially the more vulnerable road users as pedestrians and bikers obtain increased protection when blind spot mirrors are used.

• For almost the same reason, side guards (open or closed) can positively affect the vehicle safety.

• Speed limitation devices in trucks >3.5 tonnes reduces the number of accidents.

6633 IInn AAnnnneexx 55 aaddddiittiioonnaall iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn ffoorrmm AAssssoocciiaattiioonn’’ss RReeppoorrttss iiss lliisstteedd..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 125


• Rear side cameras. Again a measure to protect especially the weakest road users: When a truck moves backwards, rear-side view is poor. A camera can improve the visibility and reduces the number of accidents when a truck manoeuvres backwards.

• Sleep alert systems: A system that warns the driver when he tends to fall in sleep. • Retro reflective markings on the sides of a vehicle. As described in chapter 3 (road safety

in France), retro reflective markings can reduce the number of accidents where a vehicle crashes in the side of a truck.

• Underride guards: Trucks are far more heavier than cars. In combination with the solid chassis of the truck and the position of bumpers, the chance for passengers of a car to survive an accident is poor. The development of underride guards increases the chance to survive: The car can use its crushable zone more effective. The underride guard can also function as a crushable zone.

The quality of drivers is even more important for the safety level of a company. The following issues can be identified: • Selection of drivers • Permanent focus on drivers’ quality • Updating knowledge • Specific training courses • Motivation Just like the technical measures, there are a lot of measures that influence the behaviour of the driver. Some examples are: • Driving training, to reduce bad habits that will manifest when a truck drivers experience

increases. Damage identification and reduction programmes: This type of measures focuses on learning. Why did an incident occur and what can I (driver) and/or we (organisation) do about preventing reoccurrence?

5.1.2 Relation between government and transport sector

The more of the above mentioned aspects that are addressed in a company, the higher the safety culture. The key issue is how the government can stimulate or force companies to improve their safety culture. Let us start with stating that many companies don’t need public force or influence. They care for their safety level themselves. The work of the IRU underlines this statement (see paragraph 5.1). A clear example of so-called ‘self-regulation’ is certification. Many transport companies take part in certification systems like ISO, HACCP (transport of food), SQAS (transport of chemicals) etc. These certification systems also cover safety aspects. In addition, at national level specific certification systems exist for example in the coach sector.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 126


Speaking about the relation between government and transport sector, two ‘prototypes’ of relationships can be discovered: a horizontal and a hierarchical one. The key instruments in the latter type are regulation and enforcement. In this way the government ‘forces’ the transport sector to behave in a safe way. In the former type, the horizontal relation, the government communicates with the transport sector and stimulates safety culture in the sector itself. Certification, information, subsidy and penalty systems are instruments that are used in horizontal relations. Most often policy measures are oriented towards the hierarchical relation between government and sector. Enforcement especially is a frequently used instrument in the fight combating road accidents. However, in recent years people realise a more horizontal approach leading to a real safety culture in companies has much more potential compared to the hierarchical approach. In our opinion the ideal policy framework consists of an efficient and effective combination of ‘horizontal’ instruments and ‘hierarchical’ instruments. An interesting question for this benchmarking exercise on ‘safety culture’ is whether anything can be said with regard to the effectiveness of a horizontal, a hierarchical or a combined approach.

5.1.3 General safety performance indicators

Up until now safety culture has been applied to specific companies. This leads to indicators that reflect the safety culture of a company. However, also with regard to the general road safety level, performance indicators could be developed. The ETSC in its report ‘Transport Safety Performance Indicators’ (to be downloaded from www.etsc.be) makes a start with developing such indicators. The ETSC states that numbers of crashes, casualties or injuries are no perfect indicator of the level of transport safety. The main reason is that these indicators are subject to random fluctuations and, secondly, official statistics are incomplete. Therefore it is necessary to understand the process that leads to accidents. Safety performance indicators should be related to this process. Distinction can be made between behavioural and engineering safety performance indicators. Some aspects of road user behaviour that could function as safety performance indicator include: • speeding (main speed, speed variance, percentage of speed limit violations); • percentage use of seat belts and child restraints; • percentage use of crash helmets; • incidence of drinking and driving; • failure to stop or yield at junctions or at pedestrian crossings;

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 127

http://www.etsc.be/


• inadequate headway’s – close following; • use of daytime running lights; • use of reflective devices, especially for cyclists and pedestrians; • use of pedestrian crossing facilities (by pedestrians). Also some engineering indicators could by developed, like: • pavement friction, especially in winter and on wet road surfaces; • percentage of new cars with the top star rating in the European New Car Assessment

Programme; • percentage of technically defective vehicles; • percentage of road network not fulfilling safety design standards. With most of the indicators the problem is that the variables should be defined at European level before they could be used for European policy and international comparison. Also the methods of data collection should be harmonised. In other words, the same problems occurring in accident data are relevant for using safety performance indicators. Most of the above-mentioned indicators are focussed on road safety in general. Specifically with regard to transport companies, the following indicators could be useful: • speeding (main speed, speed variance, percentage of speed limit violations); • incidence of drinking and driving; • failure to stop or yield at junctions or at pedestrian crossings; • inadequate headway – close following; • use of daytime running lights. Also some engineering indicators could by developed, like: • pavement friction, especially in winter and on wet road surfaces; • percentage of new cars with specific safety equipment; • percentage of technically defective vehicles; • percentage of road network not fulfilling safety design standards.

5.1.4 General remarks

In the discussion concerning safety culture two main topics can be identified: • defining the right relation between government and transport companies; • finding the right indicators is the main topic. As concluded in the introduction the benchmarking work on this topic should start with a qualitative description of policy towards road transport companies. The above mentioned topics form the key part of the outline for information to be collected (next chapter). In annex 2 additional information is listed on the subject: “Human factors in safety culture”.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 128


5.2 Country reports

5.2.1 Introduction

From the participating countries four are selected to be analysed in more detail on the subject of road safety culture. These countries are: • The United Kingdom, • Germany, • France, • The Netherlands.

5.2.2 Policy framework United Kingdom

5.2.2.1 General policy

Every year, around 3,500 people are killed on Britain's roads and 40,000 are seriously injured. In total, there are over 300,000 casualties. These cause inestimable human suffering. And they represent a serious economic burden too - the direct cost of road accidents involving deaths or injuries is thought to be in the region of £3bn a year. Britain has a comparatively good road safety record. The casualty reduction targets for casualties and serious injuries, set in 1987, have been achieved. Road casualties have fallen by nearly 40% and serious injuries by 45% compared to the 1981-85 average. However, there has not been such a steep decline in the numbers of road accidents, nor in the numbers of slight injuries. Nor does our record for child pedestrian fatalities compare well with some other European countries. There is no room, therefore, for complacency. It was against this background that a new road safety strategy has been formulated64. And why there is special focus given to reducing the number of children who are killed or injured in road accidents. By 2010, the Government wishes to achieve, compared with the average for 1994-98:

• a 40% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents; • a 50% reduction in the number of children killed or seriously injured; and • a 10% reduction in the slight casualty rate, expressed as the number of people slightly

injured per 100 million vehicle kilometres.

6644 FFuullll ddeettaaiillss aarree sseett oouutt iinn tthhee SSttrraatteeggyy ““TToommoorrrrooww’’ss rrooaaddss –– ssaaffee ffoorr eevveerryyoonnee””.. TThhiiss mmaayy bbee vviieewweedd aatt

www.roads.dtlr.gov.uk/roadsafety/strategy www.roads.dtlr.gov.uk/roadsafety/strategy

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 129

http://www.roads.dtlr.gov.uk/roadsafety/strategy


As graph 5.1 shows for the number people killed or seriously injured, these targets won’t be easy to be reached. Graph 5.1 Development of number of “Killed or Seriously Injured” (KSI) in the United

Kingdom (indices: avg 1994-1998=100)

100,0 105,2 103,1 100,8 97,7 92,9 89,187,2 85,1

60,0

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

avg1994-1998

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2010

Killed or seriously injured (KSI)

The significantly higher incidence in disadvantTomorrow's Roads - Safer for Everyone contawill be reviewed every three years. A Road Sain that process.

5.2.2.2 Safety culture

In relation to the professional road transport sare driven for work purposes and that action sto reduce work-related road safety risks. The Work-related Road Safety Task Group wmeasures aimed at reducing at-work road trafDocument in February 200165. The Task Group published its report on 22 Nlegal position67 with regard to employers’ resp

6655 TThhee ddooccuummeenntt mmaayy bbee vviieewweedd aatt www.hse.g

eexxaammpplleess ooff hhooww ccoommppaanniieess hhaavvee bbeenneeffiitteedd ffrroommoonnee ccoommppaannyy ssaavveedd ££3355,,000000 iinn iinnssuurraannccee pprreemmssaaffeettyy ssttaannddaarrddss..

www.hse.g

66 The document may be viewed at http://www.hse.

130

Source: Department for Transport, UK

aged communities is also to be tackled. ins many specific recommendations, and progress fety Advisory Panel has been established to assist

ector, the Strategy recognises that many vehicles hould be taken to consider if more could be done

as therefore set up in May 2000 to recommend fic incidents. The Group published a Discussion

ovember 200166. The report sets out the current onsibilities. The Group’s main recommendation is

ov.uk/disdocs/dde16.htm aanndd ccoonnttaaiinnss ssoommee uusseeffuull aaddooppttiinngg ggoooodd ssaaffeettyy ccuullttuurree pprriinncciipplleess.. FFoorr eexxaammppllee iiuummss oovveerr aa tthhrreeee--yyeeaarr ppeerriioodd aafftteerr tthheeyy rraaiisseedd rrooaadd

ov.uk/disdocs/dde16.htm

gov.uk/road/content/traffic1.pdf.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003

http://www.hse.gov.uk/disdocs/dde16.htm

http://www.hse.gov.uk/road/content/traffic1.pdf


that employers should manage at-work road safety within their existing health and safety management systems. The Health and Safety Executive has published its response to the report and is now (October 2002) working towards issuing new guidance to help employers manage road risk by summer 2003. Traffic Commissioners (appointed by the Secretary of State for Transport) have responsibility for the licensing of the operators of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) and of buses and coaches (Public Service Vehicles or PSVs); the registration of local bus services; and disciplinary action against drivers of HGVs and PSVs. The Commissioners work closely with the Department’s Vehicle Inspectorate who are responsible for testing vehicles68.

5.2.3 Policy framework Germany


Being mobile also means a high degree of freedom and quality of life. Mobility has become increasingly important – for people’s journeys to work, in their professional lives and in their leisure time. It is of vital importance to trade and industry that freight and passenger transport movements are as smooth as possible. Economic development, European integration and the enlargement of the European Union to the east will result in a significant growth in traffic. The new information and communications technologies can help stem this rise in the volume of traffic. Mobility will continue to be a major prerequisite for progress, prosperity, growth and employment. Transport policy faces the major challenge of ensuring sustainable mobility, and ensuring it in a manner that is as safe, environmentally friendly and socially equitable as possible. Road safety activities are one of the most important tasks of transport policy, for increasing mobility will not be accepted in our society unless road safety is enhanced and there is a noticeable improvement in highway culture. Because of their weight and the noise they cause, especially at high speeds, heavy goods vehicles, in particular heavy lorries, are perceived as threatening and dangerous by other road users. On the one hand, this frequently results in other road users feeling unsafe, which may have detrimental consequences for their behaviour. On the other hand, the driving style of individual HGV drivers, especially on motorways, can disrupt the flow of traffic (hogging the left-hand lane on two-lane roads, lorry races even on three-lane roads), leading to the frequent and sudden formation of traffic jams and posing a danger to traffic. Sudden lane-changing, which is a frequent occurrence on the roads, entails a great potential risk to following vehicles. 6677 SSeeee ppaarraaggrraapphhss 2255 –– 2288 ooff tthhee TTaasskk GGrroouupp’’ss rreeppoorrtt..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 131


The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing is thus studying a package of measures to determine whether they are likely to minimise the danger posed by heavy goods vehicles. The measures include: • imposing further bans on overtaking (for specific periods of time or sections of road) on

heavy goods vehicles over 7.5 tonnes on federal trunk roads in conurbations; to this end, lessons learned in other countries where there is such a ban on overtaking in rush-hour traffic are to be evaluated;

• ensuring that the minimum distance between vehicles is kept and, if necessary, increased, and promoting technical equipment to ensure that the minimum distance between heavy goods vehicles is kept;

• carrying out more checks on domestic and foreign heavy goods vehicles with regard to driving hours and rest periods, maximum permissible speeds and weights, securely loaded cargo and the technical condition of the vehicle, especially tyres and brakes; here, priority will be given to inspecting vehicles carrying dangerous goods;

• speedily transposing Directive 2000/30/EC on technical roadside inspection into German law and carrying out inspections, inter alia at the “vacant” sites of the former border control stations at the internal borders of the European Union;

• improving the range of training courses for drivers and making it compulsory for drivers to attend a safety training course as part of their instruction;

• improving professional drivers’ instruction, if possible on a basis that continues to be voluntary;

• further improvements must be made to the conspicuity of heavy goods vehicles in conditions of poor visibility. A first step has been to authorize the use of contour markings (emphasizing the outer contours by means of retro-reflective strips). There should be a uniform requirement throughout the European Union for vehicles carrying dangerous goods, in particular, to be fitted with contour markings.

Specific information on professional transport When it took office at the beginning of the 14th parliamentary term, the Federal Government immediately launched activities to improve road safety and took initial measures. Measures have been initiated to update the programme of traffic control on federal motorways for the period from 2002 to 2007 to equip federal trunk roads with intelligent transport technology. Tried-and tested target group programmes, including safety training courses for passenger car drivers, are being revised. The new road safety programme will tap further potential. It contains measures, proposals and projects which, in co-operation with the public, will improve road safety. 6688 DDeettaaiillss ooff vveehhiiccllee tteessttiinngg aarrrraannggeemmeennttss mmaayy bbee ffoouunndd aatt www.via.gov.uk.. www.via.gov.uk

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 132

http://www.via.gov.uk/


The following deserve particular mention: • further harmonisation of driver licensing legislation. The European Commission is

currently working on the Third Driving Licence Directive. This directive provides for, inter alia, further harmonisation of driver licensing legislation. The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing is actively involved in this preparatory work;

• creating incentive schemes to encourage safe driving. Safe driving and the improvement of motorists’ own driving experience are to be encouraged by financial incentives. The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing will thus explore, together with the insurance industry, possibilities for financial incentives within the framework of the motor vehicle insurance system if drivers take part voluntarily in prospective schemes. This applies in particular to novice drivers. Here, the insurance industry, as well as the automotive industry, can provide financial assistance to initiatives to improve road safety. The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing will create the framework for testing a voluntary second training phase, making provision for a bonus in the form of a reduction of the probationary period for novice drivers;

• aspiring at European level to make ABS compulsory for all vehicles. Many newer vehicles are already fitted with anti-lock brakes (ABS). Buses, coaches and lorries over 3.5 tonnes have to be fitted with ABS. The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing will advocate, at European level, that as many new vehicles as possible be fitted with ABS;

• improving the recording of driving hours and rest periods in heavy goods vehicles, buses and coaches. The planned introduction of digital, largely tamper-proof recording equipment in heavy goods vehicles, buses and coaches in the European Union is designed to facilitate and improve the monitoring of compliance with driving hours and rest periods, which are important for road safety, and with speed limits;

• potential for enhancing the safety of schoolchildren travelling on buses. The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing attaches great importance to the safe carriage of children and adolescents by bus. It has thus taken numerous measures to further improve bus safety, such as: • the inclusion in Section 35 a of the German Road Traffic Regulations of rules governing

the fitting of seat belts in certain buses; • the adaptation of the rules governing the compulsory wearing of seat belts to the

conditions prevailing in bus transport (Section 21 a of the German Road Traffic Regulations);

• the revision of the rules governing behaviour at bus stops (Section 20 of the German Road Traffic Regulations);

• the set of requirements, formulated jointly with the federal states, for buses, coaches and minibuses used predominantly for the carriage of schoolchildren;

• the requirement that persons wishing to obtain a driving licence for the carriage of passengers by bus and coach have to attend theory and practical training courses at a driving school in accordance with the “Bus Driver Training Directive”, which was superseded by the introduction of EC driving licence category D on 1 January 1999.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 133



Germany is a federal country. Each of the federal states has its own initiatives for the improvement of road safety. One of those is the DVR, the German Road Safety Council.

The German Road Safety Council and its Members Fostering are having tasks of strengthening all measures designed to improve road safety. Also they are involved with the co-ordination of all involved organisations, the independence and initiative of which should not be restricted, towards a common, meaningful and efficient implementation of measures and activities. Their third role is the harmonisation of the measures in the fields of transport engineering, safety education and awareness raising, traffic legislation, medical care and enforcement. Figure 5.1 Tasks of the German Road Safety Council and its members

INSTITUTIONS FOR STATUTORY ACCIDENT

INSURANCE AND PREVENTION

INSTITUTIONS FOR STATUTORY ACCIDENT

INSURANCE AND PREVENTION

AUTOMOBILE CLUBS

AUTOMOBILE CLUBS

SAFETYORGANISATIONS

SAFETYORGANISATIONS

RESEARCHINSTITUTESRESEARCHINSTITUTES

INSURANCE SECTOR

INSURANCE SECTOR

CHURCHES

WELFARE ORGANISATIONS

CHURCHES

WELFARE ORGANISATIONS

TECHNICAL INSPECTION

ORGANISATIONS

TECHNICAL INSPECTION

ORGANISATIONS

ASSOCIATION OF DRIVER SCHOOL

TEACHERS

ASSOCIATION OF DRIVER SCHOOL

TEACHERS

AUTOMOBILEINDUSTRY

AUTOMOBILEINDUSTRY

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT, HOUSING & BUILDING

FEDERAL STATES

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT, HOUSING & BUILDING

FEDERAL STATES

Member Structure(ca. 260 members)

Member Structure(ca. 260 members)

The Berufsgenossenschaften (BG) are members of DVR. They are presented in the figure below. The members of the BG have to pay for all accidents that occur during work. Figure 5.2 Berufsgenossenschaften (BG) of DVR

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 134


Iron & metalworking

Construction industry Mining

Precision engineering & electrical industry

Gas & water supply

Health service

Chemical industry

Trade & Administration

Woodworking industry

Paper processing & printing

Food & related products

Stone & related products industry

Textile & leather

Transport

This system is closely linked to the German Social Insurance System. In this system the financial contributions for health insurance, pension system, unemployment Insurance and health care Insurance are made by employers and employees. The financial contributions for accident insurance system are made by employers. Several bodies are responsible for the Public Accident Insurance System. These are: • BGn from the Agricultural Sector; • public insurers; • 35 BGn from the Industrial and Trade Sector:

- with 43 Mio Persons Insured - with 3 Mio Companies as Members.

Tasks of the BGn The Berufsgenossenschaften have a number of tasks. The most important is to prevent accidents at workplace, that are work-related. This includes diseases and work-related risks for health. Another task is to investigate the causes and to provide an efficient first aid. The general objective is to reduce the consequences of work-related accidents and diseases. Road accident prevention can be seen as a shared task of both the BG’s and the DVR. This can be seen in the figure below.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 135


Figure 5.3 Road accident prevention

Road Accident Prevention

Occupational Safety andAccident Prevention

Road Safety, coordination, development andimplementation

Structure of DVR The organisation of the DVR is based on a multi-diciplined structure as can be seen in the figure below.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 136


Figure 5.4 Structure DVR

Board (honorary)25 elected members - 6 Committee Chairmen

Children andyoung Road Users

Children andyoung Road Users

AdultRoad Users

AdultRoad Users

Traffic Medicineand First Aid

Traffic Medicineand First Aid

RoadEngineering

RoadEngineering

LegalIssuesLegalIssues

VehicleEngineering

VehicleEngineering

Working Groups

Committees(as of June 2002)

Members

Guidelines There are five guidelines for the organization of occupational health and safety within the company. The 5 pillars for a well-run company are: • company Management and Occupational Safety Organisation; • assessment of Working Conditions; • involving and Instructing Employees; • planning of Occupational Safety and Health; • learning from mistakes. Making occupational safety and health a clear objective of the company management. They have to organise the fulfilment of safety and health obligations, which includes the appointing of safety specialists, company physicians and, where appropriate, safety officers. Obtaining information and passing it on within the company play a very important role in this. Without information it is impossible to monitor. The involvement and instructing of workers in this is crucial. Without their dedication it would be hopeless to continue. To safeguard their participation in occupational safety and health there are five things which are important:

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 137


• checking the employees‘ technical qualifications and aptitudes; • informing employees about their obligations and rights; • involving employees in occupational safety and health; • instructing employees; • giving employees further training where needed. Learning from Mistakes forms a central thought in this. When recognising and evaluating mistakes, future mistakes can be prevented.

5.2.3.3 “Greater safety, lower costs”; a BGL and DVR program

The Federal Association for Road Haulage, Logistics and Disposal (Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr, Logistik und Entsorgung e.V., BGL), together with the German Council for Transport Safety (Deutscher Verkehrssicherheitsrat, DVR), has developed a program that aids transportation companies with implementing specific measures for more safety on the roads and at work while saving money in the process.

The program does not need to be implemented all at once. It can be introduced step-by-step. The program does not promise any panaceas, but it does show how to find solutions within the company. The program is not intended to be short-lived, rather it should have a long-lasting effect.

The program is directed at the related causes of safety deficiencies at work, whether they are related to behaviour, or to technical or organizational shortcomings. In this manner the concept takes a step beyond the traditional approach to safety for the first time and adds a new comprehensive perspective.

The employer has two options for introducing this new safety approach in the company:

• The employer can request that a BGL/DVR program consultant come to the premises.

• The employer or an employee can attend a specific seminar.

In both cases, a detailed, well-structured manual that describes the 12 thematic components of the program will be provided. Their implementation is also a step toward preparing for the BGL “quality seal”.

The manual includes the following:

Analyses of the 12 components for company activities (cost analysis, accident analysis, damage analysis, risk and load analysis, process analysis),

12 thematic components for use as a basis of a new safety culture, measures catalogues, and checklists.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 138


12 thematic components for greater safety 1. Corporate principles - Quality management systems: actively treating safety as part of

the corporate principles.

2. Personnel: safety and quality aspects as a matter of daily routine and part of the corporate culture.

3. Driver motivation: committed employees who have direct responsibility.

4. Daily problems experienced by the drivers: understanding the "minor problems" of life as a factor of safety deficiencies.

5. Route planning: realistic route planning as key to safety.

6. Driving safely, economically, environmentally friendly: understanding the connection between safety, economical viability, and environmental protection.

7. Vehicle handling: using the tool sensibly and in a manner fair to all employees.

8. Vehicle procurement: paying attention to quality aspects.

9. Care, maintenance, servicing: promoting technical safety and safety culture through vehicle maintenance.

10. Boarding assistance, ancillary equipment, and work equipment: avoiding "incidents" at work.

11. Loading safety: distributing information to prevent serious accidents and damage to loads.

12. Risks and stress at work: safe workplaces to prevent negative physical and psychological consequences.

Quality seal The Federal Association for Road Haulage, Logistics and Disposal (Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr, Logistik und Entsorgung e.V., BGL) has embraced the idea of quality management (QM) and has expanded it to include demanding minimum requirements. Transportation companies can offer more transparency for guaranteed service commitments for luxury goods with the ‘Quality Seal for Road Haulage and Logistics’. The BGL only grants the quality seal to trucking companies that prove in the annual inspections by accredited certification bodies (SVG Zertifizierungsdienst GmbH, DEKRA ITS-Certification Services GmbH and TÜV Nord Zertifizierungs- und Umwelt-Gutachter GmbH) that they give highest priority to customer satisfaction and adhere to the standards determined by the BGL for all company processes with respect to safety, environmental protection, and performance quality.

The following is an overview of the most important BGL standards:

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 139


Safety:

• Improved insurance protection for installations of a plant. The liability coverage for the employer’s liability insurance and environment insurance each equal a minimum of one million Euro; unlimited liability coverage for the rolling stock has been established in the general liability insurance. For freight damage liability insurance, the statutory liability can be expanded with additional liability coverage after consultation and upon agreement with the customer;

• Written obligation by dispatchers and driving staff on preventing violations to social regulations. This includes having at least one training program each year and having the speedometer inspected weekly;

• Provision of a sufficient number of trucks, trailers, and additional structures needed for the specific requirements that correspond to an optimal safety standard based on semi-annual maintenance or earlier maintenance depending on the driving performance, including prospective maintenance, and can be exchanged within vehicle groups;

• Installing anchor points on additional structures, pursuant to DIN 75410, Part 1, and provision of suitable means for securing loads with a sufficient number available for the non-positive and form-fit securing of loads, however there must be at least six per (bed) surface that must be inspected during regular vehicle checks;

• Requiring regular vehicle checks for inspecting traffic safety; inspection of the operating and traffic safety upon concluding loading procedures, implementing checks along the route depending on the length of the route.

Environmental protection:

• Appointing an environment officer;

• Setup of a measures catalogue on the environment for ensuring adherence to the laws covering the factors ground, air, water, and noise;

• At least once a year an environment report shall be produced on the implementation of environmental measures and any shortcomings determined;

• The emissions of trucks are generally low.

Performance quality:

• Policies on sequence and organizational setup for quality assurance with respect to customers and the general public;

• Comprehensive and specific customer service. Criteria are: mainly written contracts, punctual, error-free and transparent invoicing procedures based on a transparent calculation system, maintenance of a detailed customer file;

• Sole use of sub-contractors that satisfy the specified quality requirements and are, to a great degree, integrated into your services process through contracts;

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 140


• System with readily-accessible information on the status of shipments and information related to any relevant disincentives for the customer;

• Guarantee of careful handling of goods. Criteria are: sole use of trained driving and warehouse staff, complete control of shipments with respect to quantity and quality;

• Requiring driving staff to carry all necessary documents in a route folder;

• If warehouse and consignment services are being offered: provision of a warehouse equipment tailored to customer needs and suitable for protecting goods as well as guaranteeing the highest level of safety for the stored goods by only employing trained personnel;

• Implementing regular warehouse checks and maintaining a warehouse records system;

• Guaranteeing reliability of new employees. Hiring only after complete information has been received on the previous two years of employment. In addition to presenting the driver license, information on aptitude and qualifications must also be submitted for driving staff;

• Specifying employee requirements in job and function descriptions;

• Promoting occupational health and safety to ensure the quality of the work processes;

• Ensuring and maintaining a sufficient level of personnel qualifications, in particular for driving and warehouse staff, dispatchers, and all managerial staff through regularly held instruction programs/training programs/further education programs and instructing employees when embarking on new tasks.

Some additional information on legislation can be found in annex 4.

5.2.4 Policy framework France


The policy of the French government on road safety is detailed in paragraph 4.2.1.


In France there is a programme focussed on prevention of risk in the company work related accidents (1300 casualties related to road accidents). In France, safety in the companies is not only an issue in the transport sector, but it’s a main element of the organisation of road safety’. Employers are responsible for the safety of their employers. Road safety is not taken into account enough. If you want to progress in road safety in general, you have to change the behaviour of the driver.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 141


An action program and evaluation of the results is implemented in public and private companies. Companies smaller than 200 employees can receive CNAM (who insures the workers for at-work accidents) subsidy in order to invest in safety measures In the private sector, two transport organisations have signed a contract on promotion of road safety. Specifically concerning use of seatbelts and other practical measures. The main objective is to reduce the safety-risk in general, in which is included the risk in road safety. The companies should be convinced that they’d have fewer expenses, less absenteeism and less turnover. Heavy vehicles are less involved in accidents than other categories, but the severity of the accidents involving heavy vehicles is much greater. Some shippers prefer more expensive transport companies instead of cheaper ones, because of the fact that the quality of the first is better. In the long run that means that quality pays, up to a certain level of financial difference. In France also the CNAM fares are reduced if the safety performance in a companies improves. If safety does not improve the fares will increase. The employer should report all work related accidents within 48 hours. The programme will be implemented in several sectors. There is a financial incentive with some vehicle insurers; if the results are showing you’ll receive a discount. The acceptance is very positive. The insurance companies use the accidents as a performance indicator. They can evaluate the record of the company. The performance of the driver is measured. A good driver = an economic driver = a safe driver. (Defensive driving: to be conscious of the limits of themselves and their vehicles.) Every professional driver, even under 3.5 tonnes GVW, ought to be obliged to train frequently because of the frequency of at-work road accidents. In France it is mandatory for all truck drivers over 3.5 tonnes GVW to follow additional driver training. Since 1995, 237.000 drivers have already been trained in the FCOS program (continuous training), and 66.000 new drivers have obtained the certificate of competence called FIMO. These programs also apply to all the coach drivers.

5.2.5 Policy framework The Netherlands


Over the last 3 years a new policy plan for Traffic and Transport has been developed in the Netherlands. Apart from setting the new objectives the plan starts the discussion on new responsibilities and the sharing of responsibilities between the private and the public sector. It no longer only concentrates on the more traditional policy instruments like legislation, but tries to start a discussion. The ambition of the National Traffic and Transportation Plan with respect to safety is to reduce the number of fatalities due to road traffic to 750 and the number of hospitalised victims 14.000. The effort required to achieve this becomes bigger as all simple actions have already been taken.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 142


The plan includes a decentralisation of responsibilities on a large scale. Where in previous years the responsibility and the budget remained with the national governments, this plan gives both responsibilities and budget to regional and local authorities. The idea behind it is that these authorities are more directly committed to their infrastructure and the connected transport and will have a better insight in the required measures.


In this chapter these new insights will be presented along with a short introduction on the National Traffic and Transport Plan, from the new concepts on public and private responsibilities, to a description of the pilot project “Safety Culture”. The National Traffic and Transportation Plan in the Netherlands The plan includes a decentralisation of responsibilities on a large scale. Where in previous years the responsibility and the budget remained with the national governments, this plan gives both responsibilities and budget to regional and local authorities. The idea behind it is that these authorities are more directly committed to their infrastructure and the connected transport and will have a better insight in the required measures. Apart form this decentralisation the plan also discusses safety in the following field described in the so-called pizza model.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 143


Figure 5.5 The Pizza model

The “pizzamodel”

individual vehicle

infra

organisation transportconcepts

networks

It discerns in the nucleus three traditional fields: infrastructure, vehicle and operator. Around this nucleus new areas have been identified as infrastructure network, transportation concepts and organisation. In this paper special emphasis is given to the organisation. Discussion on public and private responsibilities: changing world. The preceding chapter dealt with the extensive de-concentration of (political) responsibilities for safety. Now we must focus on three main issues related to that, concentrating on the question how the central government fleshes out its own responsibility: • How do citizens perceive security: what do they expect from the government? • What vision is used by the government as a basic strategic principle with a view to its

specific responsibilities? Which fundamental decisions must be taken in conjunction with this?

• How can the government translate its vision and basic principles into tangible policy instruments and goals?

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 144


Citizen’s perceptions: rising expectations Measured along objective standards The Netherlands is one of the safest countries in Europe. However, society does carry risks. A major explosion in a warehouse with fireworks in the city of Enschede and a big fire in a café in Volendam are examples of risks we run, causing many deaths and injuries these are recent examples which had a great impact. Reactions from society on these facts have it made painfully clear that safety is more than figures about facts and risks: perception of facts is just as important as the facts themselves. Safety seems to be the product of facts and perception. Therefore it is necessary that the government includes both phenomena in its own process of policy-making: in fact this should lead to a more important place for subjectivity in relation to safety, in addition to the “classic” importance of facts and figures. The perception of safety of the transport of goods has recently been researched. The results of this study can be summarized as follows. Citizens are not very concerned about the transport of goods, - as was expected The transport of goods does not appeal to citizen’s imaginations. Citizens are aware of transport, but they do not directly connect this to value judgements. Road transport, mainly large trucks and railways are most often mentioned. Transport of goods is mainly connected to the immediate environment: things people see on a daily basis. Most respondents are not completely aware of the fact that there are more relevant modalities, like transport by airplane, pipeline or ship. Shipping, air-transport and pipelines are often experienced as remote. The transport of goods has no strong negative image. It seems that citizens - when specifically asked for that- have a rather positive view. They are convinced of the fact that transport is an economic necessity, that it’s important and that it works out quite well for employment. Some respondents even express admiration for the technical performance associated to transport. Safety is no big deal for citizens: until something happens! Citizens hardly ever think about the safety of transport of goods. Without much discussion they think that it’s generally safe. In their view there are differences in safety levels: airborne transport, for instance, is seen as safer than road-transport or shipping. However, when citizens express negative feelings about transport, that is usually done in connection with noise and other environmental issues, like exhaust-fumes. Security doesn’t seem to be a big issue. Some experts are of the opinion that subjects like economy and environment are of more importance to citizens than safety. Feelings about un-safety are dormant, risks are accepted. Safety would only play a significant role in relation to incidents or disasters. We found that this connection exists, but we have to make the necessary differentiation’s: we found out that safety is not a big issue because citizens take it for granted, and not because they think it’s unimportant! Citizens take as a starting point that safety is guaranteed. Whenever it turns out that this was not the case, e.g. when a disaster occurs, they are very disappointed and feelings run very high, especially when it turns out that safety has been exchanged for economy.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 145


Citizens trust their government Citizens trust that their government will do all things possible to make sure that safety is guaranteed. They accept the fact that rules and regulations are a necessary instrument to keep transport safe. When asked whether they trust private enterprise as a provider of safety, most respondents say that they don’t have much faith in it’s ability to make things safe. Government can not leave safety-matters to the market. Citizens think that making money has a higher priority than making safety. The fact that most respondents believe that the government guarantees their safety, and that private enterprise is definitely not the main “safety-provider” does not mean that they think that private enterprise is not responsible for safety. There seems to be a gap between what people expect and what they trust.. It’s for this reason that most respondents are of the opinion that enforcement should be more strict. Citizens believe that more inspections should be carried out. This opinion diverges from standing policies in which there is a tendency to give a more important role to the market. The view of the national government. The safety of the transport of goods is of public interest, therefore a nuclear responsibility of the national government, in the existing context of decentralization of public responsibilities. No-one other than the national government can decide what level of safety is right. The national government is responsible for safety and makes a promise to society. The national government determines the preconditions for transport, and is responsible for the enforcement of relevant laws. However: government can never reach the determined safety level on its own. All participants in the transport-process have their own responsibilities. Transport-companies have the largest responsibility to make transport safe: they have to provide their part, but this does not cover the whole matter, because they have potentially conflicting interests, and they can not influence all factors that determine safety-levels. Manufactures, shippers and all other users of the infrastructure must contribute their bit towards safety. We must accept that we are dealing with positive and with negative influences on safety, and the central government has to search for the right balances between all interests that are involved.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 146


Translation into tangible policy instruments Facts and figures about transport-safety are our point of departure, but the public perception of these are of equal importance. The government is not the provider of safety, but the government is the party that is responsible for the fact that other parties make things safe. So the main topic is how the central government can model this responsibility. Central government is responsible for creating favourable conditions for safety. Starting point is: market where possible, government where necessary, but the final responsibility remains with the central government. The final interpretation of these conditions must be based on clear criteria, such as the availability of risk-assessments, or the availability of competent parties. It’s important to know the facts, and to know what society expects. Therefore the strategy to follow must be based upon monitoring developments in facts and in perceptions. The strategy should also be based on a balance between reaction on past events and developments on the one side and a clear view of future developments on the other side. By bringing these aspects together, it is possible to make rational choices between the reactive approach (avoidance-strategy) and the pro active approach (achieving-strategy).

5.3 Conclusion on road safety culture

Road safety culture origins from the individual behaviour of the subject studied, in this case: road users. In this chapter four countries are looked at in more detail. Again a classification should be made, based on benchmark techniques, concerning road safety behaviour. Two main characteristics of the behaviour/culture will be used for classification. These are: • culture is retrospective,

Retrospective behaviour/culture is focussed on learning from past experiences, “looking backward behaviour“.

• culture is prospective. Prospective behaviour/culture is focussed on acting in a flexible manner in new situations, “anticipating behaviour”.

To be able to classify the countries, a short qualitative “road safety culture” highlight description for the four distinguished country is made. Remark: The reasoning behind the four countries selected is twofold:

• Information on road safety culture is not already available in a usable form. The project partners have provided for the necessary information.

• With the selection of these four countries the full range in possible outcomes is covered.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 147


United Kingdom: The United Kingdom sees road safety as an integral part of the countries overall safety culture. One of the main results of this vision is the establishment of the Strategic Plan on road safety with the name: “Tomorrow’s roads- safe for everyone”. This Plan provides many recommendations on actions to be taken to improve road safety per road user category. Progress will be reviewed every three year. A key recommendation towards developing a better safety culture for those who use the roads for work is that employers should manage at-work road safety within their existing health and safety management systems. Overall conclusion on Safety Culture: Highly prospective Germany: In Germany general management commonly still sees (road) safety as an additional obligation without any (financial) gains. The main reason to increase (road) safety is striving for reduction of costs caused by accidents. The main initiator of a certain safety program is therefore, for instance, a dangerous situation that already has caused several incidents. Overall conclusion on Safety Culture: Strongly retrospective France: The companies should be convinced that they’d have fewer expenses, less absenteeism and less turnover in case (road) safety increases. Insurances premiums are reduced if the safety performance in a company improves. If safety does not improve the fares will increase. The insurance companies use the accidents as a performance indicator. The performance of the driver is measured. A good driver = an economic driver = a safe driver. Overall conclusion on Safety Culture: Mainly retrospective with some prospective elements The Netherlands: The main cornerstones of the Dutch (road) safety culture are: • (Road) safety is a concern of all organisational level, not only of the top (management)

levels. • “Learning Culture” or “Learning organisation”; this means that unsafe situations are

regularly and openly discussed and on base of the results of these discussions, appropriate actions are taken.

• “Reporting Culture”; the regular registration and analysis of accidents and near-accidents will provide insight in the chance that a certain type of accident will occur. On base of this registration (potential) dangerous situation can be cured even before an accident has happened.

Overall conclusion on Safety Culture:

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 148


Mainly prospective with some retrospective elements The results are shown in figure 5.6. Figure 5.6 Classification of road safety culture. (Scale: 0-100%)

0

100

0 100

Germany

France

The Netherlands

United Kingdom

Culture is

retrospective. mainly

Culture is mainly prospective.

.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 149


6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Introduction

In chapter 3, 4 and 5 information and benchmarks are discussed per level of detail as discussed in the methodology. Chapter 3 handles cluster IV benchmarks that are mainly based on (country) statistics. Chapter 4 handles road safety policy, which in this pilot is approached via the legal liabilities on professional driver training (cluster III benchmark). Chapter 5 concludes the benchmarking by studying road safety at the highest level detail, namely, the behavioural level (cluster I benchmark). To be able to use these benchmarks to draw conclusions and to set up recommendations, strings of benchmarks have to be defined. However one overall conclusion can be drawn: Conclusion one:

Although road safety can be benchmarked on a high aggregation level, the explanation of differences (“worse” or “better”) has to be found on a lower aggregation level.

With this conclusion comes a warning:

Be very careful to conclude that a road safety policy is “good” or “bad” just by monitoring (by means of benchmarking of) the number of, for instance, road traffic casualties.

This warning originates from the fact that all kinds of factors that are not to be influenced (“force majeure”) by the policymakers may affect the figures shown in a particular benchmark. To solve this problem, strings of benchmarks have to be defined. All of these strings will start with the “road safety” benchmarks as depicted in chapter 3.

6.2 Strings of benchmarks: level 1 and 2

It is stated that it is not sensible to monitor road safety purely based on road safety statistics. It is also inadvisable to conclude that a certain policy is “good” or “bad” based solely on these statistical benchmarks. To be able to do so, benchmarks of a more detailed order, cluster II/III benchmarks, are necessary. In this pilot cluster III benchmarks are performed (chapter 4). Based on these figure in essence the following four categories can be defined:

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 151


Category 1: Purely retrospective Road safety policy is nearly entirely focussed on solving of problems that already have caused incidents. An example is a reconstruction of a road crossing on which already a lot of accidents have occurred. Category 2: Mainly retrospective; partly prospective Although the main focus of the road safety policy is still retrospective (“curing” existing problems), some attention is being paid to anticipating future problems. An example is: road construction from the point of view of the (future) road users. Category 3: Mainly prospective, partly retrospective Only a minor part of the road safety policy is concerned with solving problems that have already occurred, the main focus lays on the prevention of incidents. This prevention can be seen in the form of elaborate training programs for (future) road users or as optimal road construction. Still a part of the policy is retrospective, this may show in the ticketing policy. Category 4: Nearly entirely prospective The last category consists of nearly entirely prospective policies; retrospective policies (are felt to be) unnecessary. Road safety is characterised by optimal road construction, optimal driver behaviour, etc. The main focus is to reduce (to “nihilize”) road incidents. These four categories can be used to give a primary explanation of the differences in the top-level statistical benchmarks. Of course not all differences in the number of road casualties can be explained by the cluster III benchmarks mentioned above. Figure 6.1 Strings of benchmarks road safety

Cluster III benchmark

Cluster IV benchmark (casualties per country per year)

Cluster III benchmark Other cluster II/III

explanations Cluster III benchmark (safety policy; category 4)

Cluster III benchmark (safety policy; category 3) (safety policy; category 2) (safety policy; category 1)

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 152


Figure 6.2 Strings of benchmarks road safety

Cluster IIIbenchmark Category 4 - Sweden

Cluster IIIbenchmark Category 3 - The Neth.

Cluster IIIbenchmark Category 2 - Belgium

Cluster IV benchmark (casualties per country per year)

Cluster IIIbenchmark Category 1 - Ireland

…

- Portugal - Poland

- France - Germany

- Denmark - Spain

- Finland - U.K.

It is of course important to check the relation between the statistics (cluster IV) and the policy (cluster III), if there is no relation, then there is no explanation! Form figure 6.1 it is suggested that there is at least some relation between the number of casualties (cluster IV benchmark; see also figure 3.1) and the policy category as described above. Conclusion two:

A road safety policy benchmark explains a substantial part of the differences between the figures of the (high aggregation level) benchmark of casualties.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 153


Figure 6.3 Observed relation between casualties of road accidents and road safety policies (casualties per billion kilometres)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

cat. I cat. 2 cat. 3 cat. 4

Portugal

Ireland Spain

France

Denmark Finland

Poland

Belgium Germany

The Neth.

Sweden

United Kingdom

6.3 Strings of benchmarks: level 1,2 and 3

In paragraph 6.2 is stated that a substantial part of the differences in values within the statistical benchmark can be explained by road safety policies. In chapter two it is suggested that “road safety policy” in turn, results from safety culture (cluster I benchmark; highest level of detail). In chapter two it is also stated that the higher the level of detail of benchmarks get, the lower the comparability of those benchmarks will be. In this paragraph a first impression will be presented of the relation between road safety policies and road safety culture. From the 12 strings described two will be studied in more detail. These strings are: a. Casualties, road safety policy and road safety culture of Germany, b. Casualties, road safety policy and road safety culture of United Kingdom.

6.3.1 Casualties, road safety policy and road safety culture of Germany

In this subparagraph an explanation is sought for the road safety policy this country has adopted. Following the benchmark string concept, this is performed by looking at the road safety culture of the inhabitants. Form the information that has been collected (see par. 5.2.3) it is quite clear that the focus is put on: “learning from mistakes”, which is to a large extent purely retrospective.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 154


This focus on learning from the past and curing incidents, is also shown from the Tasks of the Berufsgenossenschaften (BG). The BGn form an important part of the formalised handling of road safety. The general objective of a BG is to reduce the consequences of work-related accidents and diseases. Conclusion three:

(Road) Safety culture in Germany is focussed on learning from mistakes (retrospective, looking backward).

6.3.2 Casualties, road safety policy and road safety culture of the U.K

The road safety policy of the United Kingdom is characterised by the following objectives: • Safety for road using children

As UK road casualty statistics show a relatively high accident rate of children, additional (training) action is taken concerning this group of road users

• Road behaviour In driver training special emphasis is laid on driver behavioural aspects of road safety, partly in the form of developing road safety awareness among road users.

• Alertness of road users Alertness in traffic is strongly and negatively influenced by the usage of alcohol and drugs and by physical and/or mental tiredness. A major cause of accidents is therefore reduced alertness. Creating awareness of the relation between (the causes of) low alertness and traffic accidents is a major topic in road safety policy.

• Road infra structure Elimination of road sections with high accident rates, respecting the homogeneity of the routes.

• Speed awareness Road users tend to underestimate the effect of speed on accidents. Special attention is paid to the creation of speed awareness.

• Safe slow traffic Special attention is paid to stimulation and improving the safety of slow traffic (going on foot, bicycling). Important main effects are the reduction of congestion and pollution.

At least five of the objectives mentioned are highly prospective, or in other words, are focussed on preventing the occurrence of an incident69.

Conclusion four: (Road) Safety culture in the United Kingdom is focussed on preventing the occurrence of incidents (prospective, anticipating)

6699 TThhee ddeetteerrmmiinnaattiioonn ooff tthhee mmeennttiioonneedd oobbjjeeccttiivveess aarree bbaasseedd oonn cchhaapptteerr 44 aanndd 55,, aanndd ((mmaaiinnllyy)) oonn aaddddiittiioonnaall

iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn ffrroomm tthhee rreeppoorrtt ””SSppiieekkeenn mmaagg,, mmaaaarr wwaatt iiss hheett bbeessttee aannttwwoooorrdd””;; NNEEAA 22000022 ((DDuuttcchh oonnllyy))..

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 155


6.4 Road Safety Transition Curve

Base on all collected data and as a result of discussions with experts in the field, it became clear that road safety shows signs of evolutionary trends. This observation may mean that one overall, e.g. European wide, road safety policy is not viable. In figure 3.5 (see par. 3.3) for the years 1990 and 1999 the cluster IV data on road casualties are depicted. The actual difference in length of the bars shows the mutation in casualties. It is easy to see that some countries reached better results than others and that the overall level of casualties in 1999, as compared with 1990, has dropped substantially. Conclusion five:

The improvement of road safety in the past decade is strongly differentiated per country as is shown by the relative reduction of casualties per billion vehicle kilometres.

Relatively poor performing countries are Sweden (which already has a very low casualty level), Germany, United Kingdom, and The Netherlands. Relatively high performance countries are: Portugal, Poland and France. By way of a statistical analysis of available data from the years 1990 and 1999, an attempt has been made to define an evolutionary pattern in road safety in the form of a “Road Safety Transition Curve”. This curve represents the trend in the number of road casualties per billion vehicle kilometres of any country in time. The four road safety policy categories (see par. 6.2) are also depicted. It is believed that road safety policies also develop in time, starting with purely retrospective and highly repressive policy to highly prospective policies (see figure 6.5). In other words, in time the countries position on the RSTC curve shift from left to right. Remark:

Serious inaccuracies exist in European Statistics, not only in the actual value of a certain figure but also, and more seriously, with respect to the definition. For example, countries have different definitions concerning fatalities: dead within 6 days and dead within 30 days. The problem of non-consistent data definitions was known from the start of the pilot project. The project team hopes that the method of strings of benchmarks is not very sensitive to the problem mentioned. In figure 6.5 two lines are added to show the 10% error margin. As can be noticed the overall picture stays more or less the same.

Conclusion six:

Road safety follows an evolutionary path, starting with highly retrospective road safety policies and ending with mainly prospective policies.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 156


Remark: It is unlikely that countries can “jump” from one category to another by skipping one or

more categories. Countries and their road safety policies have to “grow” from one category to the next.

Finally, in figure 6.6 the Road Safety Transition Curve is linked with the observed road casualties. Figures of three countries are shown as an example. The figures depict, although in a very different way, a remarkable improvement of the road safety in the past decade. Furthermore, it is suggested by the figure that the road safety policy of: • Portugal should evolve from a nearly entirely retrospective and retrospective policy

towards a more prospective road safety policy. The emphasis however, should still be laid on retrospective measures and fulfilment of restrictions.

• Poland is well under way to having (a need for) a road safety policy with an even share of retrospective and prospective elements.

• France already has a road safety policy with a majority share of prospective elements. According to the figure, this share should increase further.

Conclusion seven:

By plotting the actual figures on road casualties on the Road Safety Transition Curve, insight emerges into the main characteristics of road safety policy that should be in effect.

In the next paragraph the observed classification of par. 6.3 will be confronted with the more theoretical approach adopted in this paragraph.

Remark: From the statistics a high level of injury accidents appears in the UK compared to the other countries studied. This might be caused by the use accident data rather that fatality rates for comparison purposes. It is generally recognized that valid comparisons can only be made between countries in relation to fatalities because the definitions for injuries varies widely. In the United Kingdom information on all injuries is collected while many other countries only record injuries that require hospital treatment - very broadly conform the U.K. definition of a serious injury. The definitions used in IRTAD make this clear and misapplication of the data may be affecting the conclusions in the report. Figure 6.4a and 6.4b show the difference in ranking, first sorted on base of number of injured per billion kilometres in 1999 (place 8) and the second on base of number of fatalities per billion kilometres in 1999 (place 1).

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 157


Figure 6.4a Casualties, fatalities and injured (per billion kilometres; sorted descending on base of casualties 1999)

0100200300400500600700800900

1000

Portug

al

Belgium

German

y

Poland

United

King

dom

Spain

Irelan

d

The N

etherl

ands

Sweden

France

Finlan

d

Denmark

casualties 1999injured 1999killed 1999

Figure 6.4b Casualties, fatalities and injured (per billion kilometres; sorted descending on base of fatalities 1999)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Poland

Portug

alSpa

in

Belgium

Irelan

d

France

German

y

Finlan

d

Denmark

The N

etherl

ands

Sweden

United

King

dom

casualties 1999injured 1999killed 1999

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 158


Figure 6.5 The Road Safety Transition Curve

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

2000

2250

2500

= RSTC+10% error margin = RSTC-10% error margin

RSTC

R20030124.d7 July 2003

cat. 1

oc

cat. 2
cat. 3 cat. 4 time
159


Figure 6.6 The Road Safety Transition Curve combined with observed road casualties

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

2000

2250

cat. 1 cat. 2 cat. 3 cat. 4

RSTC

casualties 1990

casualties 1999

Portugal

Poland

France

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 160


6.5 Road safety policy: observed vs. theoretical

This paragraph will show a confrontation of observed road safety policies per country of chapter 4 and the theoretical road safety policy according to the Road Safety Transition Curve. Remark:

Before the results are presented, one has to bear in mind that “observing” a road safety policy has some non-quantitative elements in itself. This can mean that the exact determination of the share of retrospective and prospective elements in road a certain road safety policy is partly depending on the opinion of the researcher.

In table 6.1 for 12 countries the road safety policy has been classified in four categories (see also par. 6.2). As seen in the previous paragraph, road safety policy evolves from purely retrospective towards highly prospective. Starting from this hypothesis, the observed and the theoretical policy should be in the same category. This includes 5 of the 12 countries. For another 6 countries the observed category is “lower” than the theoretical expected category. This means that a more prospective policy was expected than was observed. For two of these countries, e.g. Ireland and France, there is a deviation of two categories. This implies that, based on road safety statistics and observation of the road safety policy, in the road safety policy of these countries there is a strong under-representation of prospective actions. For one country, the United Kingdom, the observed category in higher than expected on base of road safety statistics. This may mean that retrospective measures and fulfilment of rules and restrictions are underrepresented in road safety policy. Remark:

Comment by the pilot participant from the United Kingdom: “I do not support your (= the pilot leader) view that in the UK "This may mean that retrospective measures and fulfilment of rules and restrictions are under represented in road safety policy". We believe the apparent high level of injury accidents occurs because of a greater level of reporting and a wider definition of injury.”

This remark may mean that the “observed” category (classification based on statistics) in case of the United Kingdom, is in fact an under classification and should be: “category 4”. Conclusion eight:

For about half of the countries studied, the observed category of road safety policy was lower than expected. This means that the retrospective elements in the road safety policies were over-represented.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 161


As evolution of road safety policies means a transition towards a more prospective focus, the policymakers will have to focus an even higher category in the near future. Conclusion nine: The future

In general it can be stated that the road safety policies will evolve from a mainly retrospective into q mainly prospective focus. It is also stated that the majority of the countries studied have road safety policies where “prevention” is underrepresented, currently or in the near future.

Table 6.1 Road safety policies per country; today’s situation. country category 1 category 2 category 3 category 4 Portugal Belgium Germany Poland United Kingdom Spain Ireland The Netherlands Sweden France Finland Denmark “Observed”; based on data collected. “Calculated”; based on the Road Safety Transition Curve.

6.5 Final remarks and recommendations

In this BOB-pilot on road safety an attempt is made to use the benchmarking tool to determine the best policy to improve road safety. The pilot started with a major data collection phase, but from the start it was clear that the pilot should be able to cope with missing information. For this reason the concept of “strings of benchmarks” was adopted. With this method is has been proven possible to link figures on a number of road traffic casualties with road safety policy and finally road safety culture. Conclusion ten:

The benchmark tool, in the form of “string of benchmarks” and in relation to the Road Safety Transition Curve, works well to determine important actors and factors behind

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 162


road safety. Furthermore, the tool also gives a first impression on which direction road safety will move in the future.

Remark:

On the highest levels of detail the benchmark tool loses some of its usability because of the increasing incomparability of the data available.

Recommendations: Recomm. 1 Although a strong relation is suggested between the number of road casualties

and road safety policy, other determining (cluster II/III) factors may exist. Further research may be needed.

Recomm.2 Two “strings of benchmarks” are studied in (more) detail. The strings selected are not the most extreme according to figure 6.2. Further research on the string “Casualties, road safety policy and road safety culture of Ireland/Portugal”, may provide additional insight in the relation.

Recomm.3 Sweden is well known for its road safety culture (“Vision Zero”; target: no road traffic casualties!), it may advisable to analyse the string for this country to gain more insight.

Recomm.4 Since the actual or observed share of retrospective and prospective elements in the road safety policy per country is the main object of study, additional research focussing on this item may be appropriate.

Remark: Retrospective and prospective elements of the road safety policy can be both quantitative and/or qualitative of origin. Concerning the more qualitative elements, the researcher’s personal opinion may also have influence on defining the actual share between quantitative and qualitative elements.

Recomm.5 As a strong relation is suggested between road casualties, road safety policy and the actual position of a country on the Road Safety Transition Curve, further study may be appropriate resulting in more country specific recommendations.

Recomm.6 As the road safety policies tend to slide in time along the Road Safety Transition Curve, a specific country can determine the general direction of the next steps to be taken in the further development of her road safety policy. This conclusion may form the basis of E.U. policy c.q. action towards the (future) member countries.

Recomm.7 A main conclusion is that in the majority of the countries that have been studied, the items on prevention are already underrepresented in road safety policy or will be in the near future. This conclusion may require special attention.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 163

ANNEX 1 COM(2001) 56 FINAL/COM(2001) 573 FINAL


COM(2001) 56 FINAL/COM(2001) 573 FINAL Annex 1a COM(2001) 56 final (text in print only) Annex 1b COM(2001) 573 final (text in print only)

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 167

ANNEX 2 BEST PRACTICE IN HUMAN FACTORS (IN SAFETY CULTURE)


BEST PRACTICE IN HUMAN FACTORS (IN SAFETY CULTURE) Importance of the human factor In general the opinion is held that approximately 80 % of all incidents and accidents in organisations can be directly put down to human behaviour. If unsafe behaviour is not corrected or prevented, chances of damage or personal injury occur. To be able to learn from earlier (mis) behaviour it is necessary to ask ourselves the question why do human errors occur. Why do drivers excess speed limits, why do they get tired, why trucks tip over, why signs are overlooked? While answering these kind of questions, we often see that human errors on the ‘workfloor’ are often a consequence of decisions made earlier, e.g. in the boardroom of transport organisations. Safe behaviour requires people to be motivated to work safely and that the working conditions are adjusted so that the chance of making errors is small. A balanced approach for transport safety and quality in general asks for attention to the human element, not only the individual but also the organisation of the company, the vehicle and its technique, and the infrastructure. Considering the role of human acts in many accidents, it would be appropriate that more attention be given to behavioural issues. The government strives to reach a certain level of safety by setting up regulations. With technical matters this is a reasonable effective method, but regulations have only a limited effect on human behaviour. Too many regulations can even have the opposite effect. For example some technical measures are counterproductive: people imagine that these same technical measures are so safe that they are willing to take more risks! We call this risk compensation. If one really wants to change driver’s behaviour a change in culture, a Safety Culture, is needed. It must become evident that it is not only the truck driver who makes mistakes, but also the management of the haulier or even the designer of the truck. If one really wants to improve safety in freight transport, then everyone from top to bottom at all levels will have to contribute. In fact it should also be considered in a wider perspective: other industry participants for instance the shipper, the insurer and the government should also be involved in improving safety (figure a1.1).

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 171


Graph A1.1 Prevention of accidents

Prevention of accidents /near-misses

time

num

ber o

f acc

iden

ts

vehicle

Driver

Organisatio

Marge of Murphy

To a safety culture in road transport; a general frame work An organisational culture tells us something about the shared values and beliefs in a company (or even a sector): what is important, how do things work here and in what manner are activities conducted here. It is evident that the culture of an operating company and the national culture together determine how the employees interpret and apply the same set of rules; rules must be managed with explicit attention to this aspect. In a company’s culture, when safety considerations must take second place to, for example economic considerations, this can put traffic safety at risk. In how far is a company, for example, prepared to stop its transport if safety is at risk? How much is someone ‘punished’ if he/she questions unsafe behaviour? Do employees participate in a bonus system, perhaps pressured to the point that they become ill? Is safety on the agenda? A safety culture can only exist if the company supports these views. Management and drivers should be all involved and convinced of its positive results for safety. After all safety can only be improved where there is knowledge, of where the errors are made. Isn’t it the driver himself who is more conscious than anyone else of all the risks in his environment: the driver who dares to choose for safety or the manager who decides to install a new and better mirror. The company should be aware of the errors that systematically occur. It is very important that near-misses are reported and openly discussed, that feedback is given to earlier mistakes an that improvements are based upon it.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 172


Important pillars of a safety Culture 1. Commitment of management: responsibility shift from the individual to the organization.

Set the good example. Do not await the judgement of third parties, but look for the underlying causes of incidents, the risks in your organisation, yourselves! The impact of Human Resource Management on safety and quality is huge. HRM practices directly affect how employees perceive their jobs. Think of organisational design, staffing, employee and organisational development, performance management, reward systems /benefits and communications and PR. HRM creates the starting point for safety and productivity in freight transport.

2. The existence of a Safety Code from Bottom up and Top Down. A Safety Cultures does not

exist without an amount of effort from everyone, from the boardroom to the work-floor. It is of utmost importance that management makes a clearly defined line in what is considered to be safe and what is not. Transparency, clarity and communication are the key issues in this matter.

3. Making Safety visible. Organisational factors that are critical for safety should be

measured and benchmarked. Examples of safety performance criteria are safety communication, HRM policies (e,g, training factors), quality of procedures, quality of equipment. To make Safety visible, people should not be afraid to report mistakes and mishaps, incidents and near-misses, even if it is their own. To accomplish such a culture, the ease of making a report is important, and, since anonymity may create distrust, it is better to have bearing reports combined with culture of confidentially. And, moreover, feedback is very important, let people know that you appreciate the information. Only a collection of relevant data, in some kind of information system, can provide us with the opportunity to process and analyse information in a pro-active way. This will give an understanding of the activities in an organization that are critical for safety, preferably before an accident happens.

4. A learning culture. In order to actively improve the safety-level, a learning organisation

needs to exist. Organisations are often afraid of earlier mistakes: they try to forget or avoid the issue. However, errors do have a positive significance and once errors are recovered, they can create a ‘learning’ influence, which can be incorporated into new procedures and working methods.

The “safety Culture” project in practice In the Netherlands approximately 1000 people are killed in traffic accidents annually. The costs of traffic un-safety are often underestimated. Accidents, injuries and environmental and economic damages caused by traffic un-safety are valued at 5 billion Euros per year in the Netherlands. Moreover the degree of acceptance of this lack of safety is not always logical.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 173


Much work still has to be done to reach the national Dutch target of reducing the number of victims. If one really wants to achieve the safety targets set, a culture change in the transport sector is necessary. The background of the project “Safety Culture in road transport” goes back to 1998. The core idea of this project is that safe behaviour can effectively be enhanced by creating the required conditions within the working environment whereby errors and violations will greatly be reduced. Policy decisions should not be a reaction on past events, but triggered by a clear view of future developments (from an avoidance strategy to a achieving strategy). Instead of making new regulations in answer to past accidents and disasters (the sticks), the emphasis is now on positive incentives (the carrots). Improving the safety level in transport, will require a huge effort from all stakeholders. An unsafe act is often a consequence of an earlier decision at another place and time. Before an accident occurs, a chain of events has already happened. We call this the underlying causes, or the safety-critical factors in an organisation. Important actors for the deliverance of a safety culture are: 1. the transport companies: company goals should change from not only prize competition but

also include quality competition; 2. the government: (highway department, road maintenance authority) as the owner of

infrastructure the government has the means to provide broader access (“window times”, use of bus-lanes) to qualitative transport companies;

3. the shipper – as the consumer/buyer he can compare the safety criteria with the price criteria when selecting a transport company. When shippers are aware of safety issues by transparency, they can take this into account (e.g. via internet). At the same time incentives can be given by the government for transport companies who are able to prove they have a good safety performance.

A great deal of the responsibility for safety remains in hands of management. The government’s role is to create the preconditions for example by introducing encouraging measures. Encouraging measures re defined: • transparency and visibility of the safety performance in transport companies and arranging

the integration of quality assurance systems, e.g. a quality mark • supplying preconditions, like an incentives system (efficient enforcement, facilitation of

accessibility, education , supply of “Best Practices”) and to build and hand over to the industry a registration system for benchmarking safety performance. The gain is two-fold: on the one hand the industry will learn from the performance of competing companies, on the other hand quality has been made quantitatively visible.

The majority of stakeholders agree that next to an improvement in safety this will also lead to an improvement in quality. The results of a pilot study have shown that a safety culture does not currently exist in the transport sector. The main issue is that safety and its costs are invisible in transport companies.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 174


The following activities will be twofold: (1) to make safety more visible buy defining performance criteria and (2) give insight in all related costs This will need to be organised with strong participation of external parties for example: insurance companies, shippers, inspection authorities, and transport unions. Our statement is that measures that coincide with the safety culture are a lot more effective. In the coming years a quality assurance organisation for freight transport will be realised, that manages a quality assurance systems and provides the quality information requested by shippers or road authorities. Conclusions: the new role of the government (corporate governance?) New insights require a new role to be taken by our Ministry, which will be a more complicated one. Related to the concern of a Safety Culture, the new role asks for a more indirect policy line from the Department, taking the following issues into consideration: • Transparency of quality and safety; • Self-regulation and certification; • Working together on safety conditions: combining initiatives from the industry as well as

the public sector itself; • Bringing in Incentives for safety results.

Companies should start working on incorporating a safety culture, but we need to ask what the consequences of a safety culture in the industry will have on governmental policies? In what way can legislation and enforcement be adjusted? Should a company with a safety culture not be given the responsibility for self-regulation? All too often safety legislation is a result of earlier accidents instead of a self-evident condition for new developments in the sector. We need to analyse our societal values to get a deeper understanding of why certain legislation helps us and other legislation has a negative effect. The industry has the knowledge and thus responsibility for their safety level. This Safety Culture case is an example of how government and industry can deal with safety collectively.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 175

ANNEX 3 SURVEY CIECA: FIGURES


SURVEY CIECA: FIGURES Figure 1 What is the minimum age for obtaining a driving license in your country? C C+E D D+E Austria 18 18 21 21 Czech Republic 18 18 21 21 Denmark 18 18 21 21 France 18 18 21 21 Germany 18 18 21 21 Great Britain 21 21 21 21 Ireland 18 18 21 21 The Netherlands 18 18 18 18 Spain 18 18 21 21 Sweden 18 18 21 21 Figure 2 What is the minimum age to begin with the training for the certificate of

professional competence? C C+E D D+E Austria 16 16 16 16 Czech Republic 16,5 18 19,5 21 Denmark 18 18 21 21 France 16 (CAP) 15 (BEP) 16 (CAP) 15 (BEP) 21 21 Germany 16 16 Great Britain Ireland The Netherlands 16 16 16 16 Spain 18 18 21 21 Sweden

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 179


Figure 3 What is the minimum age for obtaining the Certificate of professional competence?

C C+E D D+E Austria 18 18 21 21 Czech Republic 18 18 21 21 Denmark 18 18 21 21 France 18 18 Germany Great Britain Ireland The Netherlands 16 16 16 16 Spain 18 18 Sweden 18 18 18 18 Figure 4 Is a certificate of professional competence compulsory in your country for

drivers under 21 years of age (Cat C, C+E) or for drivers without one year experience in a restricted area (Cat D, D+E)?

C C+E D D+E Austria Yes Yes Czech Republic Yes Yes Yes Yes Denmark No No No No France Yes Yes Yes Yes Germany Yes Yes No No Great Britain Yes Yes No No Ireland The Netherlands Yes Yes Yes Yes Spain Yes Yes Sweden Yes Yes Yes Yes

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 180


Figure 5 Is a certificate of professional competence compulsory in your country for drivers over 21 years of age (Cat C, C+E) or for drivers without one year experience in a restricted area (Cat D, D+E)?

C C+E D D+E Austria No No No No Czech Republic Denmark Yes Yes No No France Yes Yes Yes Yes Germany No No No No Great Britain No No No No Ireland The Netherlands Yes Yes Yes Yes Spain No No No No Sweden No No No No Figure 6: What kind of training exists in your country for the certificate of professional

competence? (before/after getting the driving license) Austria Both theory and practical training Czech Republic Both theory and practical training Denmark Both theory and practical training France Both theory and practical training Germany Both theory and practical training Great Britain No CPC training exists Ireland The Netherlands Both theory and practical training Spain Both theory and practical training Sweden Only theory training

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 181


Figure 7 Is training for the Certificate of professional competence compulsory? Austria Yes, theory and practical training is compulsory Czech Republic Yes, theory and practical training is compulsory Denmark No, CPC training is not compulsory France No, CPC training is not compulsory Germany No, CPC training is not compulsory Great Britain No, CPC training is not compulsory Ireland The Netherlands Yes, theory and practical training is compulsory Spain No, CPC training is not compulsory Sweden Yes, theory training is compulsory Figure 8 Does continuous training, after obtaining the license, exist in your country? C C+E D D+E Austria Yes Yes Yes Yes Czech Republic Denmark Yes Yes Yes Yes France Yes Yes Yes Yes Germany Yes Yes Yes Yes Great Britain Yes Yes Yes Yes Ireland Yes Yes Yes Yes The Netherlands Yes Yes Yes Yes Spain Yes Yes Yes Yes Sweden Yes Yes Yes Yes

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 182


Figure 9 Is continuous training, after obtaining the license, compulsory in your country? C C+E D D+E Austria No No No No Czech Republic Denmark No No No No France Yes Yes Yes Yes Germany No No No No Great Britain No No No No Ireland The Netherlands No No No No Spain No No No No Sweden No No No No

Figure 10 Overview of the certificate of professional competence and continuous training in France

LA FORMATION DES CONDUCTEURS ROUTIERS

FORMATION INITIALE

Candidats de moins de 18 ans Candidats de plus de 18 ans

CAP BEP CFP

Catégories C et E (C) A l’âge de 18 ans

MINISTERE DE L’EDUCATION NATIONALE(Lycées Technologiques) MINISTERE DU TRAVAIL

Catégories C, E(C), D et E(D) A l’âge de 21 ans

FORMATION (2ou3ans)

Début : 16 ansContenu : idem au permis

de conduire + matièresScolaires ( français,anglais …

Début : 15 ansContenu : idem CAP + gestion

techniques des compagniesde transport

FORMATION

Durée : 330 heuresou 3 semaines Durée : 7 semaines

CAP BEP C et E (C ) D et E(D)

Système « TRADITIONNEL»Permis catégories C, E (C ), D, E(D)

Auto-écoles traditionnelles

Passage de l’examen du permis de conduire

FIMOPour les conducteurs de véhicules de plus de 7,5 tonnes de PTAC.

La possession d’un CAP, BEP ou CFP équivaut à la FIMODurée : 4 semaines

FORMATION CONTINUE

FCOS

AFT-IFTIM, AFPA, PROMOTRANS.

Pour les conducteurs de véhicules de plus de 3,5 tonnes ou 14 m3Transport de marchandises ou de passagers

Durée : 3 jours (=24 heures au total) Périodicité : tous les 5 ans

Contenu : Révision des connaissances techniques et du Code de la route,de la législation, des techniques de conduite, comportement d’urgence,

Comportement envers les autres usagers.

Obligatoire quelque soit le mode d’accès à la conduite (CAP,BEP,CFP,permis trad.)

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 183

ANNEX 4 LEGISLATION GERMANY


LEGISLATION GERMANY There are references to legislation, covering the organisation of occupational health and safety. These are: • Basic responsibilities of employers

- §§3 and 4 ArbSchG; § 21 section 1 SGB VII; § 2 BGV A 1 • Co-operation between several employers

- § 8 section 1 ArbSchG; § 6 section2 BGV A 1 • Assessment of danger - §§ 5 and 6 section 1 ArbSchG • Employees‘ obligations - §§ 15 and 16 ArbSchG; § 21 section 3 SGB VII • Employees‘s qualifications and aptitudes - § 7 ArbSchG • Employee‘s rights - § 17 ArbSchG; § 7 BGV A 4 • First Aid – BGV A 5 • Drawing up lists of hazardous substances - § 16 section 3a GefStoffV • Procurement of hazardous substances - § 16 GefStoffV • Instruction of employees - § 112 ArbSchG; § 7 section 2 BGV A 1 • Involvement of employees in occupational health and safety - § 8 BGV A 1 • Medical check-ups - § 11 ArbSchG; § 28 GEfStoffV; § 6 BildschArbV; BGV A 4 • Committees for occupational health and safety - § 11 ASiG • Organisation of occupational health and safety - § 3 section 2 ArbSchG • Employment of subcontractors - § 8 ArbSchG; §§ 5 and 6 section 1 BGV A 1 • Personal protective equipment – PSA-BV • Safety and health protection marking – BGV A 8 • Safety Officers - § 22 SGB VII together with § 9 BGV A 1 • Safety Specialists – ASiG together with BFV A • Technical safety and medical care for employees

– ASiG togehter with BFV A 6 and BGV A 7 • Temporary employees – AÜG; § 12 section 2 ArbSchG • Tests, controls, safety inspections - § 5 ArbSchG; §§ 3 and 6 ASiG • Transfer of occupational health and safety obligations - § 12 BGV A 1 • Transfer of tasks within the company - § 7 ArbSchG • Involvement of employees‘ council - §§ 81, 87, section 1 No. 7; 89-91 BetrVG • Company physicians – ASiG together with BGV A 7

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 187

ANNEX 5 ASSOCIATION’S REPORTS


ASSOCIATION’S REPORTS CEA Insurance companies Interaction between insurers and transport companies Financial feedback on the insurance system comes through the no-claims bonus system and deductibles. Individual insurance companies also have monitoring and reporting systems for watching the development of accidents. These systems can be used for examining not only the factors that have contributed to the accidents but also the costs incurred, in cooperation with transport businesses. The information can also be used for devising prospective measures. Insurers may also give their customers feedback in connection with claims handling about how the particular vehicle is suited for the purpose, how it should be loaded etc in order to reduce the risk of accident. Besides the abovementioned reporting systems, insurers offer their corporate customers educational services. In the case of transport businesses this refers to comprehensive programmes designed for upgrading corporate culture. These programmes focus on not only road safety but also on the correct working methods, loading, cargo handling, occupational safety, and losses resulting from accidents other than losses covered by insurance. In driver training, there is currently a shift in the focus of training from the handling of heavy equipment to risk identification, risk avoidance and economical driving. Small companies and personal customers are provided with insurer education through campaigns of various kinds on various themes. Customers may also attend training courses arranged by insurance companies, such as winter driving courses. Summary tires of heavy vehicles In this survey the main objectives were to find information on the unfastening of tyres in heavy vehicles and separations of towing vehicles and trailers. The main source of information was from the database of the Finnish Police Force (RIKI) from the year 1998-1999. Information on fatal accidents from the Finnish road accident investigation team's records was also looked at. In tyre unfastening accidents concerning heavy vehicles it has to be pointed out that there is always the possibility of large and even fatal damage for other road users. In typical tyre unfastening accidents the twin wheels from the left-hand side of the trailer roll over into the lane of oncoming vehicles. Tyre unfastening accidents seem to be more common during the wintertime. This is probably due to snow banks. Snow banks prevent the tyres from rolling freely from the road and once a tyre hits an oncoming vehicle or vehicles causing an accident, the accident details will be reported for police records. The vehicle from which the tyre(s) has been

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 191


unfastened will often keep its stability and usually incurs only minor damages. There are also signs that temperature and inclination of road surface has an effect in tyre unfastening accidents. In Finland there are approximately 150 accidents of this type per year reported to the police. Altogether there are around several hundred tyre unfastening accidents yearly. Fatal accidents happen approximately every second year. The tyre unfastens more often from trailers than from the truck itself. This is most likely to occur due to the driver having a poorer sense of driving behaviour of the trailer compared to the truck itself. Foreign trucks and trailers have very few tyre unfastening or trailer separation accidents in Finland. Tyre fastening incidents concerning trucks happens under extremely heavy stress and needs to be monitored regularly. In order to ensure that tyres arte regularly maintained, some form of tyre records should be kept. Trailer and truck separation accidents are more common with full trailers. The most common reason is due to the pulling coupling becoming loose. The pulling coupling is very difficult to inspect without disassembling it which is why an official document of verification of full trailer drawing vehicle coupling should exist. This document should be renewed yearly and checked during inspection. The screw nut of the pulling couple has to be renewed after inspection. It would be advisable to prohibit all repairs of the drawbar. Trailer separation accidents from passenger cars can be connected to the (ill)maintenance of trailers. Small and light trailers are relatively cheap and seldom used, which is why the maintenance is easy to neglect. The mechanism of an accident is simply that the trailer breaks off from the drawing vehicle. In most recorded cases the towing car has been relatively new (age under 10 years) and was suitable for towing. A bulletin on the maintenance of light trailers is therefore necessary. Passenger car trailers should also be inspected during roadside inspections. TISPOL Traffic Police Traffic Police forces are experienced in enforcement of legislation focussed on professional transport. A report on efficiency and effectiveness of enforcement as well as differences between enforcement approaches between countries will be very interesting for this benchmark exercise. Enforcement and Professional Transport Introduction The number of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) is increasing tremendously each year. Thousands and thousands of commercial trucks are on the road delivering their goods every day throughout Europe. But are they safe? What kind of condition is the driver in, or what is the condition of the truck? What about the contents of the truck? Are the goods transported in a proper and legal way? All these questions are asked regularly amongst enforcement people like, for instance, the Vehicle Inspectorate, Customs and Excise, etc.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 192


In the past they made checks on HGV’s independently without notifying other people in the enforcement field but this changed in 1996. The West Midland police brought all enforcement bodies existing in the UK together for joint action plans on major checks on HGV’s. After the first nationwide road check, held on the same day, all parties were astonished by the results. There were many offences against number of driver hours, dangerous and defective vehicles were found, disqualified drivers, stolen vehicles and property, and many fraud cases emerged. Up till now twenty-eight nationwide road checks have been conducted under the name “Mermaid”. From the year 2000 five nationwide checks have been conducted each year. These road checks have a multi-agency approach, with the other enforcement agencies taking part and examining the vehicles and drivers stopped by Traffic Police. Mermaid in Europe Observers from six European countries were invited to observe the check at the UK Operation Mermaid on 13 April 1999. They visited several road checkpoints and were debriefed by the Head of Traffic Division of the Metropolitan Police in London. All countries indicated that similar style road checks were performed in their own countries, and the representatives agreed to support the concept of European-wide coordinated commercial vehicles checks with the first one on 22 September 1999. Since that time the number of Traffic Police Services participating in “European Operation Mermaid” has increased to ten, with Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, and United Kingdom working together. Other countries such as Norway and Switzerland are interested in joining the “European Operation Mermaid” There have now been four successful “European Operation Mermaid” actions. In those actions over 100,000 heavy goods vehicles have been stopped and controlled with in total over 39,000 offences detected. 13,400 of those vehicles were controlled for dangerous conditions, 1,852 of them were so dangerous, that they were not allowed to continue their journeys. 11,458 tachograph and driver hours offences were detected. All checks were carried out in more or less the same way, i.e. the same way of stopping cars, the same way of asking and checking papers, the same technical checks on the vehicles and their equipment, the check of driving hours and resting period, etc. Conclusion The cooperation involved in “European Operation Mermaid” allows for maximum deployment of resources at one time, which permits many vehicles and drivers to be stopped at the roadside and controlled. Research undertaken in Norway has shown that increasing the number of roadside technical inspections of HGV’s is associated with a reduction in crash rates. The results of “European Operation Mermaid” show that the Operation is a major factor for improving road safety and reducing road accidents and road casualties in Europe.

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 193

ANNEX 6 CONTRIBUTING ORGANISATIONS


CONTRIBUTING ORGANISATIONS Names of the partners and participants of the BOB Road Safety Pilot Name Organisation Status I. Buttler Motor Transport Institute Road Traffic Safety Centre Participant Y. Bonduelle Conseil Général des Ponts et Chaussées- 2éme section Participant S. Faulkner Road Safety Division, Department for Transport Participant D. Vandenberghe CIECA Participant W. Suchorzewski Warsaw University of Technology (WUT) Participant A. Starren Dutch Ministry of Transport Participant K. van Seventer TISPOL Participant P. Jackson AWAKE, DTLR Participant J. Jumpanen CEA Participant J. Lacroix Deutscher Verkehrssicherheitsrat e.V. Participant J. Horin MOT, Czech Republic Participant T. Barrett Department of Public Enterprise, RHD, Ireland Participant W.Smolders IRU Participant B. Claerbout MOT, Belgium Participant A. Zaragoza MOT, Spain Participant L. Gordon OGM Partner A.W. van den Engel NEA, Transport Research and Training Partner M. Podbregar FAV- Transport Technology Systems Network Partner M. Bernardo INECO Partner N. Fearnley Institute of Transport Economics (TOI) Partner

R20030124.doc 7 July 2003 197

Date post:	07-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times