understanding national road safety...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Understanding National
Road Safety Performance
Kavi Bhalla, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of International Health
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
History of traffic deaths: UK, USA
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
UK
De
ath
s (
tho
us
an
ds
)
US
A D
ea
ths
(th
ou
sa
nd
s)
USA
UK
History of traffic death rates: UK, USA
33
USA
UK
History of traffic death rates: UK, USA
44
USA
UK
History of traffic death rates: UK, USA
55
USA
UK
History of traffic death rates: OECD countries
6
7
Why did road deaths rise and
fall in OECD countries ?
Three explanations:
1. Economic determinism
2. Risk transition
3. Paradigm shift & Transition to a policy era
8
Why did road deaths rise and
fall in OECD countries ?
Three explanations:
1. Economic determinism*
2. Risk transition
3. Paradigm shift & Transition to a policy era
* For a full critique: Bhalla, K. and Mohan, D., 2016, Understanding the road safety performance
of OECD countries, in Traffic Safety Matters, G. Tiwari, S. Mukherjee, and Mohan D (eds),
Taylor and Francis.
History of traffic death rates: OECD Countries
9
10
Road Death Rates and Income
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10000 20000 30000 40000
Road
TrafficDeathRate,p
er100000popula
on
Income,RealGDPpercapita(PPP)
OECDCountries
10
Environmental Kuznets Curve
11
Road Death Rates and Income
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10000 20000 30000 40000
Road
TrafficDeathRate,p
er100000popula
on
Income,RealGDPpercapita(PPP)
OECDCountries
Road death rates will rise until 2047!
(Kopits & Cropper, World Bank, 2005)
India
(Now)
11
Environmental Kuznets Curve
Income, Real GDP per capita (PPP, $)
Kuznets Hypothesis: Traffic injury Literature
• Soderlund N, Zwi, AB. Traffic related mortality in industrialized and less developed countries. Bulletin of the
World Health Organization. 1995.
• Van Beeck EF, Borsboom GJ, Mackenbach JP. Economic development and traffic accident mortality in the
industrialized world, 1962-1990. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2000;29(3):503–509.
• Kopits E, Cropper M. Traffic fatalities and economic growth. Accident Analysis and Prevention.
2005;37(1):169–178.
• Garg N, Hyder A. Exploring the relationship between development and road traffic injuries: a case study
from India. The European Journal of Public Health. 2005;16(5):487–491.
• Bishai D, Quresh A, James P, Ghaffar A. National road casualties and economic development. Health
Economics. 2005;15(1):65–81.
• Paulozzi LJ, Ryan GW, Espitia-Hardeman VE, Xi Y. Economic development's effect on road transport-
related mortality among different types of road users: A cross-sectional international study. Accident
Analysis and Prevention. 2007;39(3):606–617.
• McManus W. The Economics of Road Safety: an International Perspective. University of Michigan
Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor, MI; 2007.
• Law TH, Noland RB, Evans AW. Factors associated with the relationship between motorcycle deaths and
economic growth. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2009;41(2):234–240.
• Grimm M, Treibich C. Determinants of road traffic crash fatalities across Indian states. Health Economics.
2012;22(8):915–930.
• Nishitateno S, Burke PJ. The motorcycle Kuznets curve. Journal of Transport Geography. 2014;36:116–
123.
12
13
Road Death Rates and Income
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10000 20000 30000 40000
Road
TrafficDeathRate,p
er100000popula
on
Income,RealGDPpercapita(PPP)
OECDCountries
13Income, Real GDP per capita (PPP, $)
14
Road Death Rates and Income
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10000 20000 30000 40000
Road
TrafficDeathRate,p
er100000popula
on
Income,RealGDPpercapita(PPP)
OECDCountries
India
(Now)
14Income, Real GDP per capita (PPP, $)
1515
Vietnam : NowVietnam: Motorizing by motorcycles
Source: www.flickr.com/photos/jkjohnson/3298451423
Colombia: Motorizing by cars
Source: http://mikesbogotablog.blogspot.com/2014/10/will-subway-bury-bogota.html16
17
Why did road deaths rise and
fall in OECD countries ?
Three explanations:
1. Economic determinism
2. Risk transition*
3. Paradigm shift & Transition to a policy era
*Bhalla, K., Ezzati, M., Mahal, A., Salomon, J., & Reich, M. (2007). A risk-based method for
modeling traffic fatalities. Risk Analysis, 27(1), 125–136.
18
Imagine a motorizing society …
Increasing car ownership leads to fewer pedestrians
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage N-1 Stage NStage 0 Stage N-2
19
What happens to societal risk?Assumptions:
• r is the probability that a pedestrian will be killed by a given car
• car occupants are at negligible (zero) risk
0
0
0
0
0
0
r
r
r
r
r
0
Total 0 5r
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage N-1 Stage NStage 0 Stage N-2
20
What happens to societal risk?Assumptions:
• r is the probability that a pedestrian will be killed by a given car
• car occupants are at negligible (zero) risk
Rising risk Falling risk
0
0
0
0
0
0
r
r
r
r
r
0
2r
2r
2r
0
2r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total 0 5r 8r 8r 5r 0
Stage 1 Stage 2
5r
0
0
0
0
0
Stage N-1 Stage NStage 0
4r
0
0
0
4r
0
Stage N-2
21
Simulation Simulation
Historic
Data
Historic
Data
21
22
Simulation Simulation
Historic
Data
Historic
Data
22
1. Risks to car occupants
2. There are always pedestrians
3. Interventions!
4. Other types of vehicles?
2323
Dealing with mixed-mode motorization
• Pair-wise risks:
• scooters are at risk from cars, pedestrians, buses, other scooters
• environment is a risk-factor
2424
Modeling deaths: in mixed-mode motorization
Probability of death:= Prob. of crash x Prob. of death in the event of a crash
deathcarped= ccar
ped. rcar
ped
ccarped = f (# of pedestrians, # of cars, vehicle attributes, driver
attributes, roadway infrastructure, systemic attributes)
rcarped = f (vehicle attributes, victim attributes, crash conditions,
post-crash medical care)
2525
Modeling deaths: in mixed-mode motorization
1. Probability of crash: cveh1veh2
Assume perfect mixing of modes
ccarped= [K. (Number of cars)*(Number of pedestrians)]
CarM/cycle
Pedestrian
Bus
2626
Pedestrian Motorcycles Cars Bus Environment
Pedestrian 0 0.040 0.080 0.135 0
Motorcycles 0.020 0.021 0.080 0.135 0.053
Cars 0 0.002 0.009 0.090 0.030
Bus 0 0 0.001 0.009 0.037
Environment N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Modeling deaths: in mixed-mode motorization
2. Probability of death in event of crash: rthreatvictim
rcarbus
threat
vic
tim
Crash Fatality Rate Matrix
CFR in
single
vehicle
crashes
27
Crash Fatality Rate matrixv
icti
m
threat
Full model :
deaths carped = [K . # Peds . # Cars] . rcar
ped
Pedestrian Motorcycles Cars Bus Environment
Pedestrian 0 0.040 0.080 0.135 0
Motorcycles 0.020 0.021 0.080 0.135 0.053
Cars 0 0.002 0.009 0.090 0.030
Bus 0 0 0.001 0.009 0.037
Environment N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
28
Crash Fatality Rate matrixv
icti
m
threat
Full model :
deaths carped = [K . # Peds . # Cars] . rcar
ped
Realistic Motorization Scenarios
Pedestrian Motorcycles Cars Bus Environment
Pedestrian 0 0.040 0.080 0.135 0
Motorcycles 0.020 0.021 0.080 0.135 0.053
Cars 0 0.002 0.009 0.090 0.030
Bus 0 0 0.001 0.009 0.037
Environment N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
1.High Car Use
2.High Motorcycle Use
2929
Motorization Scenarios(that are a bit more realistic)
High car use High Motorcycle use
• Include buses: 40% of all trips
• Each bus trip, requires a pedestrian trip
(i.e. there’re always a lot of pedestrians around)
3030
Consider 2 Scenarios of Motorization
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Mo
dal S
ha
re
Proportion of trips that are motorized
Scenario: High Car Use
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Mo
dal S
ha
re
Proportion of trips that are motorized
Scenario: High Motorcycle Use
Pedestrians Pedestrians
Cars
Buses Buses
Motorcycles
Cars
Motorcycles
3131
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
De
ath
s
Proportion of trips that are motorized
Total Road Deaths
Scenario:High Car
3232
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
De
ath
s
Proportion of trips that are motorized
Total Road Deaths
Scenario: High Car
Scenario: High Motorcycle
33
Crash Fatality Rate matrixv
icti
m
threatPedestrian Motorcycles Cars Bus Environment
Pedestrian 0 0.040 0.080 0.135 0
Motorcycles 0.020 0.021 0.080 0.135 0.053
Cars 0 0.002 0.009 0.090 0.030
Bus 0 0 0.001 0.009 0.037
Environment N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
3434
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0
De
ath
s
Prop of trips that are motorized
Scenario:High Car-Use
Other Pedestrian
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0
De
ath
s
Prop of trips that are motorized
Scenario:High Motorcycle-Use
Other Pedestrian
PedestrianPedestrian
Other Other
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
De
ath
s
Proportion of trips that are motorized
Total Road Deaths
Scenario: High Car
Scenario: High Motorcycle
34
35
Why did road deaths rise and
fall in OECD countries ?
Three explanations:
1. Economic determinism
2. Risk transition
3. Paradigm shift & Transition to a policy era*
*Work in Progress
36
Road Death Rates and Income
36
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10000 20000 30000 40000
Road
TrafficDeathRate,p
er100000popula
on
Income,RealGDPpercapita(PPP)
OECDCountries
Income, Real GDP per capita (PPP, $)
37
Road Death Rates and Income
37
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10000 20000 30000 40000
Road
TrafficDeathRate,p
er100000popula
on
Income,RealGDPpercapita(PPP)
19OtherOECDCountries
USA
UK
Income, Real GDP per capita (PPP, $)
38
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
RoadTrafficDeathRate,p
er100000popula
on
Year
Road Death Rates and Time
38
What happened in time?
Time-Series Cross-Sectional Analysis
39
ln(drit ) =a +b1 ×gdpit + b2 ×gdp2
it + b3 ×urbit + b4 × popdensityit +ui + vt +eitéë
ùûage-sex-gps
What happened in time?
Time-Series Cross-Sectional Analysis
40
ln(drit ) =a +b1 ×gdpit + b2 ×gdp2
it + b3 ×urbit + b4 × popdensityit +ui + vt +eitéë
ùûage-sex-gps
Kuznets Hypothesis
Country fixed-effects
Time fixed-effects
• Time-Series Cross-Section Methods following Beck & Katz
• Lagged dependent variable to account for serial auto-correlation
• Validation: in-sample & out-of-sample
• 16 separate models for age- sex- groups
4141
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Co
effic
ien
t o
f T
ime
What happens in time? Mortality effects: elderly
Female Male
Age 80+
42
What happens in time?
19
72
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Co
effic
ien
t o
f T
ime
19
72
Elderly
42
4343
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Co
effic
ien
t o
f T
ime
19
72
Elderly
Children
What happens in time?
4444
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Co
effic
ien
t o
f T
ime
19
72
Elderly
Young
adults
Children
Young
women
What happens in time?
Mortality trends in OECD countries
45
Something happened!
History of road safety in the US
• 1900 – 1950s:
– Road safety is about “nut behind the wheel”
– Research: primarily in driver psychology
• 1950s-1960s:
– Road safety: shifts towards biomechanical tolerance of human body
– Research: shifts towards engineering the vehicle
• mid 1960s:
– Ralph Nader writes “Unsafe at Any Speed”; GM’s response causes
scandal
– 1967 US Congress enacts Motor Vehicle Safety Act => NHTSA
• 1970s onwards:
– Increasing regulation of roads and road users => an era of interventions!
46
Mortality trends in OECD countries
47
Paradigm Shift
4848
• 1967 (September): Sweden shifts from left to right hand driving
• 1968: Sweden established a new authority, the Road Safety Agency
• 1975: Front seat belts become mandatory
• 1975: Helmet law for motorcyclists
• 1976: Driving test for motorcycle
• 1977: Daytime running lights
• 1978: Moped helmet
• 1979: Cycle light in nighttime
• 1982: All slow moving vehicles shall have a warning sign
• 1986: Reflectors on cycles (front, back and wheels)
• 1987: Speed fines increased
• 1988: mandatory seat belts for children
• 1990: Blood Alcohol Content limit lowered from 0.05 to 0.02%; Start trials with automatic speed enforcement
• 1994: Limit for serious intoxicated: 0.1 %; Number of random breath tests doubled; Speed limit enforcement by laser.
• 1995: Median steel wire barriers; (speed limit increased for heavy vehicles)
• 1996: airbags standard in all new cars;
• 1997: “Vision Zero” is taken by Parliament
• 1998: roadside steel wire barriers
• 1999: Seat belt law expanded (taxi drivers, lorry occupants); winter tyresmandatory in winter conditions
Policy history - Sweden
Policy History: Sweden
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
De
ath
s p
er
10
0 0
00
po
pu
lati
on
1999: winter tires mandatory in winter conditions
1968: New road safety agency established
1975: Front belts and helmet use mandatory1976: Driving tests for motorcycles
1977: Daytime running lights1978: Moped helmets required
1979: cycle lights required for night
1982: Signs for slow moving vehicles
1986: Reflectors on cycles
Speed fines increased: 1987
mandatory restraints for children: 1988
BAC limits lowered, 0.05 to 0.02%: 1990
Auto speed enforcement trials: 1990
# of random breath tests doubled: 1994
Median steel wire barriers: 1995Airbags standard in all new vehicles: 1996“Vision Zero” is adopted by Parliament: 1997
Roadside steel wire barriers: 1998
Policy History: UK
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
De
ath
s p
er
10
0 0
00
po
pu
lati
on
1970: Heavy vehicle: driving tests & limits on driving
hours1972: 16 years olds limited to riding mopeds
1974: helmets; vehicle lighting regulations
Mini roundabouts
introduced:1976
Helmet standards: 1977
Hvy veh hours adjusted: 1978Fog lamps on new vehicles
Higher stds for helmets: 1980
Braking stds for heavy veh: 1982
Front belt use mandatory: 1983
1984: Spray reducing devices: Trucks
1987: National road safety targets;
Slow vehicle amber lights
1991: Highway safety audits;
20 mph zones1992: 60 mph limiters, trucks
New traffic calming regulations: 1993
Speed limit lowered for buses/trucks: 1994Driving test strengthened: 1996
2000: New road safety
strategy & targets
Policy History: Netherlands
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
De
ath
s p
er
10
0 0
00
po
pu
lati
on
1971: Mandatory seat belts in new cars
1972: Mandatory helmets for motorcycles
1974: Speed limits reset; Alc limit set to 0.05%
1975: Mandatory helmets for mopeds
1976: Rules for children in cars (e.g.
forbidden on laps in front)
1977: Heavy vehicles, trailers must have
reflective markings
1979: Moped/bike pedal reflectors
1983: 30 km/h zones
Vehicle inspections required: 1985
Moped/bike side reflectors: 1987
Rear seatbelts fitted in new cars: 1990Belt use in lorries, vans, car rear seats:1992
1995: Speed limiters bus
& truck
52
Lessons: Poor countries need not wait
52
Paradigm Shift:Birth of institutions
53
Summary: History of road safety performance
The “income” explanation• More cars kill more people road deaths initially rise with income
• At some income level countries begin to care about the rising death toll
and implement policies Road deaths later fall with income
The “mode shift” explanation• As people move from being pedestrians to car occupancy, total societal
risks rises initially due to threat from cars and later falls as pedestrians
are eliminated from the system.
The “policy era” explanation• Starting in the 1960s, countries established national road safety agencies,
gave them legislative “teeth”. Over successive years, interventions were
implemented, compliance was improved, deaths came down.
54
For more information, please contact:
Kavi Bhalla, PhD
Assistant Professor,
Leon Robertson Faculty Development Chair
Department of International Health
Johns Hopkins School of Public Health
615 N. Wolfe Street, E8138, Baltimore, Maryland 21205
Phone: 954.849.8692, [email protected]
Thank You!