IRTAD Activities and Management of Road Infrastructure Safety

Transcription

1 IRTAD Activities and Management of Road Infrastructure Safety Sangjin Han Expert Group Meeting on Road Safety Seoul, 8-10 May 2013

2 2 Outline IRTAD in a nutshell Twinning program Management of Road Infrastructure Safety

3 I. IRTAD in a Nutshell 3

4 4 The International Transport Forum at the OECD Think Tank Annual Summit Intergovernmental Organisation 54 Member Transport Ministries (recent members: Chile and China) ITF Summit 2013 (Funding Transport, May 22-24, Leipzig)

5 5 IRTAD: the International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group Permanent working group under the umbrella of ITF and OECD 70 members from 35 countries Mission World standard road safety database Networking for safety professionals Data analysis and research

6 IRTAD-LAC 6

7 Why an international group on safety data? Comprehensive data collection and analysis are essential for: designing effective safety strategies setting achievable targets developing and determining intervention priorities monitoring programme effectiveness Harmonized definitions and data collection for meaningful international comparisons

8 8 IRTAD database: aggregated data from 33 countries Aggregated at country level: Accident data: fatalities, injury crashes, hospitalised By road type (motorway, urban, rural) By road users (pedestrians, cars, cyclists ) By age bands By gender Serious injuries : MAIS3+ (as of 2012) Exposure data Vehicle fleet Mileage by road type or vehicle type Population by age Driver licences Modal split Other safety data : Seat belt wearing rates by road types Helmet wearing

9 9

10 10 IRTAD 2013 Annual Report Synthesis of trends in 2011 Preliminary data for 2012 Detailed reports for 34 countries Trends over recent years Road safety strategies and targets Recent safety measures Detailed safety data regarding road users, crashes by road types, driver behaviours (speed, drink driving, etc..) List of useful resources

11 Reduction in fatalities

12 12 IRTAD Study: Reporting Serious Injuries Why slower progress? Can we trust the data? 2010 France Germany Fatalities Hospitalised x Injured x

13 13 IRTAD Study: Recommendations Complement police data with hospital data Medics not police to assess severity of injuries Classify injuries to international standards Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale Agree an international definition of serious injuries for research and benchmarking Define seriously injured road casualty as injuries assessed at level 3 or more on the Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale MAIS3+ This definition has now been adopted by the EU

14 II. Twinning Program 14

15 15 Twinning programme Objectives : Sharing experience of IRTAD Members - To improve safety data collection and analysis systems based on international best practices - To develop and operate adequate safety data management system of - To progressively expand IRTAD coverage while keeping a high quality data Concept: Twinning a team of experts from IRTAD with a team from a LMIC: - Data experts - Policy makers -Police -Research

16 16 Twinning programme Tailor-made to the specific needs of the country Audit of existing crash data collection system Recommendation for development / improvement Acquisition of necessary equipment Technical assistance Training : database development, safety indicators, monitoring Regular monitoring and exchange between twinning countries Regular reporting at IRTAD meetings

17 17 Twinning programme Argentina / Spain Funded by WB Led to the creation of the Ibero American Road Safety Observatory Cambodia / Netherlands Funded by FIA Foundation Focus on data linking, performance indicators and monitoring Jamaica / UK Funded by IADB Focus on data quality, linking Possible scope for a Road Safety Observatory in the Carribean South Africa / Sweden (under preparation ) Vietnam Indonesia / Australia (under preparation) Cameroun France (under prepration )

18 18 Twinning programme Funding Source M.O.U between World Bank GRSF and ITF/OECD signed in 2008 Grant provided by GRSF under certain conditions: - Existing infrastructure loan in the country Other funding sources: - Through voluntary contributions

19 19 III. Management of Road Infrastructure Safety

20 20 Management of Road Infrastructure Safety Sub-Working Group in IRTAD (2012.9) Background - Road authorities are key players for improving road safety (vehicles, users) - Good practices of road infrastructure safety programs can be shared e.g. EU Road Infrastructure Safety Management (Directives 2008/96/EC )/RSA, RSI, etc - Road infrastructure safety need to be monitored e.g. Potential accident cost savings for road network safety management (Germany and Austria)/ Road Assessment Program

21 21 Why Road Infrastructure Safety Evaluation? Questions - All design criteria are satisfied, BUT some road sections have more accidents? - Attributable on road users, careless driving! BUT why people make mistakes on certain road sections more? Design Standards cannot explain all - Design standards are mimimum No incentive to introduce higher standards - Design standards cannot consider interactions in different design factors

22 22 Why Road Infrastructure Safety Evaluation? Roads are public goods - Having certain number of users Captive demands are guaranteed - Less motivation for better service Safe System Approach - Road Users, Vehicles, and Road Infrastructures all go together for safer system -Basic: People can make errors! - How road infrastructure can protect imperfect people from being hurt in crash - A road authority is a key player in safe system - Benchmark vehicle industry (Volvo) - Vision Zero (S), Sustainable Safety (N), Towards Zero (Australia)

23 23 Good practices of road infrastructure safety management - Road Infrastructure Safety Management (EU) Road Safety Impact Assessment Road Safety Audit High Risk Sites In-depth Investigation **Legal requirements for all EU-TEN roads (EU Directives2008/96/EC) -Safety Performance Indicators Benchmarking safety of other countries SatetyNET, ETSC reports SUNFlower Projects DaCoTa

24 24 Good practices of road infrastructure safety management - Road Assessment Program EuroRAP, AusRAP, usrap, irap etc. - Road Safety Measures Efficiency Assessment Accident Modification Functions/Factors ROSEBUD (UK) etc. - ESN models Difference from ideal road conditions (average safety level) Potential accident cost savings Implemented in Germany and Austria

25 25 Management of Road Infrastructure Safety Monitoring road infrastructure safety - Crashes per kilometre - Crashes per vehicle kilometre travelled - Risk in relation to roads with similar flow levels - Potential cost savings from crash reductions Examples: - German ESN models -Risk Map in RAP

26 Thank you Sangjin HAN Postal address 2 rue Andre Pascal Paris Cedex 16